The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Redundancy and the choice of hydrologic indices for characterizing streamflow regimes
Abstract
The utility of hydrologic indices for describing various aspects of streamflow regimes has resulted in their increased application in riverine research. Consequently, researchers are now confronted with the task of having to choose among a large number of competing hydrologic indices to reduce computational effort and variable redundancy prior to statistical analyses, while still adequately representing the major facets of the flow regime. The present study addresses this concern by providing a comprehensive review of 171 currently available hydrologic indices (including the commonly used Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration) using long‐term flow records from 420 sites from across the continental USA. We highlight patterns of redundancy among these hydrologic indices and provide a number of statistically and ecologically based recommendations for the selection of a reduced set of indices that can simultaneously (1) explain a dominant proportion of statistical variation in the complete set of hydrologic indices and (2) minimize multicollinearity while still adequately representing recognized, critical attributes of the flow regime. In addition, we examine the transferability of hydrologic indices across ‘stream types’ by identifying indices that consistently explain dominant patterns of variance across streams in varying climatic and geologic environments. Together, our results provide a framework from which researchers can identify hydrologic indices that adequately characterize flow regimes in a non‐redundant manner. In combination with ecological knowledge, this framework can guide researchers in the parsimonious selection of hydrologic indices for future hydroecological studies. Copyright © 2003 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.
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
Cited by
The CAMELS data set: catchment attributes and meteorology for large-sample studies
(2017) · doi:10.5194/hess-21-5293-2017 · Cited by 1,037
OLDEN, J. D., & NAIMAN, R. J. (2010) · Freshwater Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02179.x · Cited by 965
Self-citationPoff, N. L. (2018) · Freshwater Biology · doi:10.1111/fwb.13038 · Cited by 389
Self-citationA Ranking of Hydrological Signatures Based on Their Predictability in Space
Addor, N., Nearing, G., Prieto, C., Newman, A. J., Le Vine, N., & Clark, M. P. (2018) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2018wr022606 · Cited by 359
Life history theory predicts fish assemblage response to hydrologic regimes
Mims, M. C., & Olden, J. D. (2012) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/11-0370.1 · Cited by 325
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Olden, J. D., & Poff, N. L.
- Venue
- River Research and Applications
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-01-13
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 101-121
- ISSN
- 1535-1459 (ISSN-L)
- 1535-1467
- OpenAlex
- W2026934896
- Cited by
- 1,166
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 24.31
- 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: Redundancy and the choice of hydrologic indices for characterizing streamflow regimes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/rra.700
- The paper
- Olden, J. D., & Poff, N. L. (2003). Redundancy and the choice of hydrologic indices for characterizing streamflow regimes. River Research and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.700
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.