Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 217

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Characterization of watershed model behavior across a hydroclimatic gradient

Open access
van Werkhoven, Kathryn, Wagener, Thorsten, Reed, Patrick, Tang, Yong·2008·Water Resources Research

Abstract

A fundamental tradeoff exists in watershed modeling between a model's flexibility for representing watersheds with different characteristics versus its potential for overparameterization. This study uses global sensitivity analysis to investigate how a commonly used intermediate‐complexity model, the Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting Model (SAC‐SMA), represents a wide range of watersheds with diverse physical and hydroclimatic characteristics. The analysis aims to establish a detailed understanding of model behavior across watersheds and time periods with the ultimate objective to guide model calibration and evaluation studies. Sobol's sensitivity analysis is used to evaluate the SAC‐SMA in 12 Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX) watersheds in the US. The watersheds span a wide hydroclimatic gradient from arid to humid systems. Four evaluation metrics reflecting base flows, midrange flows, peak flows, and long‐term water balance were used to comprehensively characterize trends in sensitivity and model behavior. Results show significant variation in parameter sensitivities that are correlated with the hydroclimatic characteristics of the watersheds and time periods analyzed. The sensitivity patterns are consistent with the expected dominant processes and demonstrate the need for moderate model complexity to represent different hydroclimatic regimes. The analysis reveals that the primary model controls for some aspects of the simulated hydrograph are different from those typically assumed for the SAC‐SMA. Results also show that between 6 and 10 parameters are regularly identifiable from daily hydrologic data, which is about twice the range that is often assumed (i.e., 3 to 5). Synthesized results provide comprehensive SAC‐SMA calibration guidance, demonstrate the flexibility of the model for representing multiple hydroclimatic regimes, and highlight the great difficulty in generalizing model behavior across watersheds.

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 · 10.1029/2007wr006271

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 217

Metadata

Authors
van Werkhoven, K., Wagener, T., Reed, P., & Tang, Y.
Venue
Water Resources Research
Published
2008-01
Volume
44
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-7973
OpenAlex
W1826246963
Cited by
217
References
4
FWCI
15.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Characterization of watershed model behavior across a hydroclimatic gradient. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2007wr006271
The paper
van Werkhoven, K., Wagener, T., Reed, P., & Tang, Y. (2008). Characterization of watershed model behavior across a hydroclimatic gradient. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007wr006271

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.