The DOI matches its Crossref record.
AUTOMATED METHODS FOR ESTIMATING BASEFLOW AND GROUND WATER RECHARGE FROM STREAMFLOW RECORDS1
Abstract
ABSTRACT: To quantify and model the natural ground water recharge process, six sites located in the midwest and eastern United States where previous water balance observations had been made were compared to computerized techniques to estimate: (1) base flow and (2) ground water recharge. Results from an existing automated digital filter technique for separating baseflow from daily streamflow records were compared to baseflow estimates made in the six water balance studies. Previous validation of automated baseflow separation techniques consisted only of comparisons with manual techniques. In this study, the automated digital filter technique was found to compare well with measured field estimates yielding a monthly coefficient of determination of 0.86. The recharge algorithm developed in this study is an automated derivation of the Rorabaugh hydrograph recession curve displacement method that utilizes daily streamflow. Comparison of annual recharge from field water balance measurements to those computed with the automated recession curve displacement method had coefficients of determination of 0.76 and predictive efficiencies of 71 percent. Monthly estimates showed more variation and are not advocated for use with this method. These techniques appear to be fast, reproducible methods for estimating baseflow and annual recharge and should be useful in regional modeling efforts and as a quick check on mass balance techniques for shallow water table aquifers.
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
Model Evaluation Guidelines for Systematic Quantification of Accuracy in Watershed Simulations
Moriasi, D. N., Arnold, J. G., Liew, M. W. V., Bingner, R. L., Harmel, R. D., & Veith, T. L. (2007) · Transactions of the ASABE · doi:10.13031/2013.23153 · Cited by 13,446
Self-citationSWAT: Model Use, Calibration, and Validation
Arnold, J. G., Moriasi, D. N., Gassman, P. W., Abbaspour, K. C., White, M. J., Srinivasan, R., Santhi, C., Harmel, R. D., van Griensven, A., Liew, M. W. V., et al. (2012) · Transactions of the ASABE · doi:10.13031/2013.42256 · Cited by 3,450
Self-citationGassman, P. W., Reyes, M. R., Green, C. H., & Arnold, J. G. (2007) · Transactions of the ASABE · doi:10.13031/2013.23637 · Cited by 3,040
Self-citationRegional estimation of base flow and groundwater recharge in the Upper Mississippi river basin
Arnold, J. G., Muttiah, R. S., Srinivasan, R., & Allen, P. M. (2000) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/s0022-1694(99)00139-0 · Cited by 462
Self-citationLoperfido, J. V., Noe, G. B., Jarnagin, S. T., & Hogan, D. M. (2014) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.07.007 · Cited by 204
Metadata
- Authors
- Arnold, J. G., & Allen, P. M.
- Venue
- JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1999-04
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 411-424
- ISSN
- 1093-474X (ISSN-L)
- 1752-1688
- OpenAlex
- W2055950383
- Cited by
- 802
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.12
- 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: AUTOMATED METHODS FOR ESTIMATING BASEFLOW AND GROUND WATER RECHARGE FROM STREAMFLOW RECORDS1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1999.tb03599.x
- The paper
- Arnold, J. G., & Allen, P. M. (1999). AUTOMATED METHODS FOR ESTIMATING BASEFLOW AND GROUND WATER RECHARGE FROM STREAMFLOW RECORDS1. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1999.tb03599.x
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.