...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Earth Surface Processes and Landforms: The journal of the British Geomorphological Research Group >Comparing landscape evolution models with quantitative field data at the millennial time scale in the Belgian loess belt
【24h】

Comparing landscape evolution models with quantitative field data at the millennial time scale in the Belgian loess belt

机译：在比利时黄土带的千年尺度上，将景观演化模型与定量田间数据进行比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This study compares three landscape evolution models and their ability to correctly simulate measured 2500year landscape evolution in two small catchments in the Belgian loess belt. WATEM LT and LAPSUS both model tillage and water erosion and deposition and have detachment-limited descriptions for water erosion and deposition. Equations in LAPSUS are more mechanistic than those in WATEM LT. WATEM LTT resembles WATEM LT, but is a transport-limited model. All three models are DEM-based. Calibration and validation simulations were performed forward in time on (1D) transects for four spatial resolutions, and backward in time for (2D) catchments at 20m resolution. For transects, model outputs were compared with discretized observations of transect shape. For catchments, outputs were compared with point observations of palaeo-altitude, averaged over landscape element classes. For transects, the three models performed well, resulting in model efficiency factors of 0.92 to 0.99 for calibration and 0.62 to 0.96 for validation. However, for catchments, simulations showed that the transport-limited WATEM LTT model could not realistically simulate long-term landscape evolution. Performance of WATEM LT and LAPSUS at catchment scale was similar to that on transects, although LAPSUS has problems with backward calculation. Tests demonstrate that a transport-limited approach cannot be used to model long-term landscape evolution in the Belgian loess belt, which is in agreement with theoretical and empirical understanding of soil erosion processes in this environment. The difference in performance between transport-limited and detachment-limited models is clear only when the models are evaluated in a 2D catchment. The lack of such distinction when models were applied in a 1D transect highlights the importance of evaluating landscape evolution models in a 2D setting so that effects of flow convergence/divergence can be accounted for.
机译：这项研究比较了三种景观演变模型及其在比利时黄土带两个小流域正确模拟测得的2500年景观演变的能力。 WATEM LT和LAPSUS都对耕作，水蚀和沉积进行建模，并对水蚀和沉积的分离性进行了描述。 LAPSUS中的方程比WATEM LT中的方程更具机械性。 WATEM LTT与WATEM LT类似，但是是运输受限的型号。这三个模型都是基于DEM的。在四个空间分辨率下，在（1D）样点上及时向前执行校准和验证模拟，而在20m分辨率下，对（2D）集水区及时向后执行校准和验证模拟。对于断面，将模型输出与断面形状的离散观测值进行比较。对于集水区，将产出与古海拔的点观测值（在景观要素类上平均）进行比较。对于样条，这三个模型表现良好，因此模型效率系数的校准系数为0.92至0.99，验证系数为0.62至0.96。然而，对于集水区，模拟显示运输受限的WATEM LTT模型无法现实地模拟长期景观演变。尽管LAPSUS在向后计算方面存在问题，但是WATEM LT和LAPSUS在集水区规模上的表现与样带相似。试验表明，不能使用运输受限的方法来模拟比利时黄土带的长期景观演变，这与对该环境下土壤侵蚀过程的理论和经验理解是一致的。仅当在二维集水区中评估模型时，运输受限模型和脱离受限模型之间的性能差异才很明显。将模型应用于一维断面时缺乏这种区分，这突出说明了在二维环境中评估景观演化模型的重要性，这样可以考虑流量收敛/发散的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号