Journal of Geographical Sciences ›› 2020, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (12): 2053-2075.doi: 10.1007/s11442-020-1827-3
• Research Articles • Previous Articles Next Articles
ZHANG Yongyong1(), CHEN Qiutan1,2, XIA Jun1
Received:
2020-04-29
Accepted:
2020-08-02
Online:
2020-12-25
Published:
2021-01-05
About author:
Zhang Yongyong (1981‒), PhD, Associate Professor, specialized in watershed hydrological and environmental modeling. E-mail: Supported by:
ZHANG Yongyong, CHEN Qiutan, XIA Jun. Investigation on flood event variations at space and time scales in the Huaihe River Basin of China using flood behavior classification[J].Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2020, 30(12): 2053-2075.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks
Table 1
The general characteristics of controlled catchments, and the selected flood events"
ID | Rivers | Stations | Dam regulation | Catchment area (km2) | Slope length (km) | Slope (%) | Elevation (m) | River density (km/km2) | Major land use (%) | Flood events | Precipitation (mm) | Potential evapotranspiration (mm) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Shaying River | ZiLS | / | 1800 | 89.4 | 22.15 | 818.3 | 0.027 | Forest (67.6) | 12 | 80.0±76.3 | 36.9±18.0 |
2 | ZhongT | / | 485 | 41.4 | 29.07 | 680.2 | 0.019 | Forest (77.5) | 13 | 71.0±55.2 | 26.7±13.8 | |
3 | XiaGS | Yes | 354 | 36.9 | 19.67 | 471.0 | 0.083 | Forest (45.0) | 10 | 54.4±36.9 | 32.2±21.5 | |
4 | RuZ | Yes | 3005 | 73.4 | 16.54 | 662.2 | 0.016 | Forest (45.8) | 11 | 54.0±27.1 | 42.8±19.3 | |
5 | GaoC | Yes | 627 | 49.1 | 13.98 | 493.8 | 0.055 | Dryland (58.4) | 5 | 57.2±68.1 | 42.5±32.3 | |
6 | ZhongM | / | 2106 | 132.3 | 1.28 | 144.3 | 0.027 | Dryland (53.4) | 5 | 65.9±51.8 | 34.7±8.3 | |
7 | JiZ | / | 46 | 10.5 | 16.16 | 394.0 | 0.023 | Forest (73.9) | 5 | 54.4±87.7 | 18.7±9.8 | |
8 | XinZ | Yes | 1079 | 75.5 | 5.37 | 268.4 | 0.027 | Dryland (63.6) | 10 | 134.1±80.6 | 65.7±68.1 | |
9 | HeK | Yes | 2124 | 116.4 | 3.32 | 153.1 | 0.004 | Dryland (72.4) | 9 | 57.2±35.4 | 38.0±14.8 | |
10 | LuoH | Yes | 12,150 | 170.0 | 7.75 | 316.5 | 0.002 | Dryland (59.7) | 6 | 45.3±34.3 | 44.9±12.0 | |
11 | ZhouK | Yes | 25,800 | 202.1 | 4.47 | 214.9 | 0.001 | Dryland (67.5) | 3 | 54.1±52.6 | 44.6±41.8 | |
12 | Hongru River | XuT | / | 70 | 13.9 | 22.67 | 554.1 | 0.430 | Dryland (61.4) | 3 | 64.1±57.6 | 26.9±18.7 |
13 | SuiP | Yes | 1760 | 96.4 | 5.08 | 164.9 | 0.030 | Dryland (59.4) | 9 | 67.5±37.1 | 23.0±28.4 | |
14 | YangZ | Yes | 1037 | 61.5 | 4.23 | 141.9 | 0.122 | Dryland (65.4) | 5 | 12.8±14.0 | 26.0±14.8 | |
15 | WuGy | Yes | 1564 | 107.8 | 2.37 | 105.9 | 0.054 | Dryland (73.2) | 8 | 38.3±46.2 | 36.7±17.0 | |
16 | LiX | / | 78 | 18.0 | 6.50 | 175.5 | 0.095 | Dryland (38.0) | 10 | 39.8±32.9 | 24.6±26.3 | |
17 | ZhuMD | / | 104 | 17.8 | 2.74 | 105.3 | 0.113 | Dryland (75.0) | 3 | 37.5±31.1 | 10.2±4.1 | |
18 | MiaoW | Yes | 2660 | 95.2 | 1.39 | 81.4 | 0.026 | Dryland (77.8) | 12 | 43.4±52.4 | 47.6±16.8 | |
19 | LuZ | / | 396 | 38.4 | 9.50 | 214.7 | 0.031 | Forest (56.5) | 14 | 24.7±29.3 | 18.4±9.9 | |
ID | Rivers | Stations | Dam regulation | Catchment area (km2) | Slope length (km) | Slope (%) | Elevation (m) | River density (km/km2) | Major land use (%) | Flood events | Precipitation (mm) | Potential evapotranspiration (mm) |
20 | XinC | Yes | 4110 | 178.5 | 0.86 | 66.2 | 0.043 | Dryland (79.8) | 2 | 71.1±10.6 | 60.7±1.6 | |
21 | BanT | Yes | 11,280 | 197.6 | 1.69 | 88.5 | 0.008 | Dryland (74.2) | 4 | 18.6±26.1 | 34.9±28.8 | |
22 | GuiL | Yes | 1050 | 57.6 | 3.76 | 133.3 | 0.108 | Dryland (67.0) | 6 | 31.1±38.1 | 31.5±10.4 | |
23 | Southern mountainous rivers | TanJH | / | 152 | 24.3 | 20.33 | 279.9 | 0.040 | Forest (88.2) | 12 | 81.2±54.9 | 25.7±12.7 |
24 | ZhuGP | Yes | 1639 | 94.2 | 7.11 | 159.8 | 0.036 | Forest (43.6) | 14 | 75.6±66.0 | 51.4±19.9 | |
25 | XinX | Yes | 274 | 31.5 | 19.40 | 286.1 | 0.071 | Dryland (57.7) | 16 | 79.2±54.1 | 42.8±32.2 | |
26 | HuangNZ | / | 805 | 48.9 | 24.03 | 487.4 | 0.006 | Forest (46.5) | 10 | 25.1±34.5 | 24.5±9.6 | |
27 | QiL | / | 185 | 31.4 | 26.65 | 531.5 | 0.006 | Forest (58.3) | 14 | 29.6±31.2 | 15.6±6.6 | |
28 | HuangC | Yes | 2050 | 117.9 | 6.76 | 156.7 | 0.036 | Dryland (47.7) | 6 | 52.2±30.1 | 84.6±38.7 | |
29 | BeiMJ | / | 1710 | 111.6 | 2.88 | 101.9 | 0.037 | Paddy (47.7) | 16 | 73.4±37.7 | 56.1±17.2 | |
30 | JiangJJ | Yes | 5930 | 161.2 | 11.99 | 246.6 | 0.008 | Forest (36.5) | 8 | 54.5±34.3 | 61.8±30.6 | |
31 | PeiH | Yes | 18 | 8.6 | 30.98 | 390.3 | 0.167 | Forest (100.0) | 9 | 87.9±54.2 | 22.6±12.4 | |
32 | Huaihe mainstream | DaPL | Yes | 1640 | 70.0 | 6.68 | 218.2 | 0.111 | Forest (45.9) | 13 | 58.1±36.6 | 44.9±21.5 |
33 | ChangTG | Yes | 3090 | 78.0 | 5.51 | 185.5 | 0.031 | Dryland (41.1) | 14 | 79.6±45.9 | 53.4±22.9 | |
34 | XiX | Yes | 10,190 | 124.7 | 4.86 | 148.2 | 0.008 | Dryland (36.2) | 10 | 84.5±46.0 | 75.8±24.5 | |
35 | HuaiB | Yes | 16,005 | 138.7 | 3.93 | 125.0 | 0.005 | Dryland (43.2) | 10 | 60.2±43.1 | 96.1±46.4 | |
36 | LuTZ | Yes | 88,630 | 232.3 | 4.14 | 147.7 | 0.001 | Dryland (54.3) | 5 | 73.6±70.8 | 73.7±46.4 | |
37 | BengB | Yes | 121,330 | 279.3 | 3.23 | 123.6 | 0.001 | Dryland (57.2) | 4 | 46.53±39.7 | 47.7±31.4 | |
38 | WangWQ | Yes | 200 | 33.2 | 0.91 | 63.3 | 0.131 | Dryland (91.4) | 12 | 28.8±27.5 | 24.3±11.9 | |
39 | WangJB | Yes | 30,630 | 159.8 | 2.77 | 104.5 | 0.003 | Dryland (56.6) | 4 | 107.1±59.1 | 113.6±22.4 |
Table 2
Flood behavior metrics used for flood event descriptions"
Categories | Behavior metrics | Abbreviation | Unit | Calculation equation |
---|---|---|---|---|
Magnitude | Total amount of flood | Rsum | mm | ${{{R}_{sum}}=86.4\cdot {{10}^{-3}}\cdot {{Q}_{sum}}}/{A}\;={86.4\cdot {{10}^{-3}}\cdot \sum\limits_{t=tbegin}^{tend}{{{Q}_{t}}}}/{A}\;$ |
Maximum peak flood | Qpk | none | ${{{Q}_{pk}}={{{Q}_{t,\max }}}/{{{Q}_{sum}}}\;=\max ({{Q}_{t}})}/{{{Q}_{sum}}}\;$ | |
Duration | Flood event duration | Tduration | d | ${{T}_{duration}}={{F}_{end}}-{{F}_{begin}}+1$ |
Timing | Timing of flood event | Fbegin | d | ${{{T}_{pk}}=({{F}_{pk,\max }}-{{F}_{begin}}+1)}/{{{T}_{duration}}}\;$ |
Timing of maximum peak flood | Tpk | none | ||
Rate of changes | Mean rate of positive changes | RQrise | 1/hr | $R{{Q}_{rise}}=\frac{({{Q}_{t,\max }}-{{Q}_{Fbegin}})}{[{{Q}_{sum}}\cdot ({{t}_{pk,\max }}-{{F}_{begin}})\cdot 24]}$ |
Mean rate of negative changes | RQdown | 1/hr | $R{{Q}_{down}}=\frac{({{Q}_{t,\max }}-{{Q}_{Fend}})}{[{{Q}_{sum}}\cdot ({{F}_{end}}-{{t}_{pk,\max }}+1)\cdot 24]}$ | |
Flood forms | Number of peak flood | Npk | none | $CV={\sigma }/{{{Q}_{av}}}\;$ |
Coefficient of variation | CV | none |
Table 3
Potential impact factor categories used to analyze the space and time variations of flood events"
Factor categories | Factors | Flood event implications | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Geography | Location | Longitude and latitude (Long and Latt) | All the behavior categories | |
Catchment | Area (Cat_A, km2), average elevation (Cat_ae, m), slope (Cat_slp, %) and length (Cat_len, km) | Magnitude, rate of changes and forms | ||
River | Slope (Rch_slp, %) and length (Rch_len, km), with-depth ratio (Rch_wdr, m/m), river density (Rch_den, km/km2) | Magnitude, rate of changes and forms | ||
Land use | Land use area | Paddy (Lu_pad, km2), dryland (Lu_dry, km2), forest (Lu_fst, km2), grass (Lu_grs, km2), water (Lu_wat, km2), urban (Lu_urb, km2) and unused land (Lu_uns, km2) | Magnitude, rate of changes and forms | |
Hydrometeoro- logy | Precipitation | Cumulative amount in the antecedent three, five and seven days (Pcp_3d, Pcp_5d, Pcp_7d, mm) and during the flood event (Pcp_tot, mm), annual amount (Pcp_ann, mm) and ratio of flood season (R_fldpcp) | All the behavior categories | |
Potential evapotranspiration | Cumulative amount in the antecedent three, five and seven days (Pet_3d, Pet_5d and Pet_7d, mm) and during the flood event (Pet_tot, mm), annual amount (Pet_ann, mm) and ratio of flood season (R_fldpet) | Magnitude | ||
Baseflow | Baseflow index (BFI) | Magnitude, duration and forms | ||
Human regulation | Water storage project | Number (Num_rsv), total and beneficial capacities (Tot_rsv and Use_rsv, 108 m3), and their ratios of annual average runoff magnitude (R_totrsv and R_usersv) | All the behavior categories | |
Water diversion project | Number (Num_wdp) and total capacities (Tot_wdp, 108 m3) | Magnitude | ||
Water pumping project | Number (Num_wpp) and total capacities (Tot_wpp, 108 m3 | Magnitude | ||
Water transferring project | Total capacity (Tot_wtp, 108 m3) | Magnitude |
Figure 5
Variations of individual flood behavior metrics among different classes. Median values are defined by the solid dot symbols, respectively. Each black box illustrates the 25th and 75th percentile values, and the vertical line defines the minimum and maximum values without outliers. The white dot means the 50th percentile value and the violin shape means the frequency distribution of flood behavior metric."
[1] | Ali G, Tetzlaff D, Soulsby C et al., 2012. A comparison of similarity indices for catchment classification using across-regional dataset. Advance in Water Resources, 40:11-22. |
[2] | Anctil F, 2010. Wavelet analysis of the interannual variability in Southern Quebec Streamflow. Journal of Climate, 17(1):163-173. |
[3] | Boughton W C, 1993. A hydrograph-based model for estimating the water yield of ungauged catchments, paper presented at Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium. Inst. of Eng. Aust., Newcastle, N.S.W. |
[4] | Brunner M I, Viviroli D, Furrer R, Seibert J et al., 2018. Identification of flood reactivity regions via the functional clustering of hydrographs. Water Resources Research, 54(3):1852-1867. |
[5] | Burn D H, Boorman D B, 1992. Catchment classification applied to the estimation of hydrological parameters at ungauged catchments (technical report 118). Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK: Institute of Hydrology. |
[6] | Chapman T A, 1999. Comparison of algorithms for stream flow recession and baseflow separation. Hydrological Processes, 13(5):701-714. |
[7] | Han D, Cluckie I D, Karbassioun D et al., 2002. River flow modelling using fuzzy decision trees. Water Resources Management, 16(6):431-445. |
[8] | Hargreaves G H, Samani Z A, 1982. Estimating potential evapotranspiration. Journal of the Irrigation & Drainage Division, 108(3):225-230. |
[9] | Hirabayashi Y, Mahendran R, Koirala S et al., 2013. Global flood risk under climate change. Nature Climate Change, 3:816-821. |
[10] | Kennard M J, Pusey B J, Olden J D et al., 2010. Classification of natural flow regimes in Australia to support environmental flow management. Freshwater Biology, 55:171-193. |
[11] | Kumar A R S, Goyal M K, Ojha C S P et al., 2013. Application of ANN, fuzzy logic and decision tree algorithms for the development of reservoir operating rules. Water Resources Management, 27:911-925. |
[12] | Li Z L, Xu Z X, Li J Y et al., 2008. Shift trend and step changes for runoff time series in the Shiyang River basin, Northwest China. Hydrological Processes, 22:4639-4646. |
[13] | Liao S H, Wen C H, 2007. Artificial neural networks classification and clustering of methodologies and applications: Literature analysis from 1995 to 2005. Expert Systems with Application, 32(1):1-11. |
[14] | Lyne V, Hollick M, 1979. Stochastic time-variable rainfall-runoff modelling, I. E. Aust. Natl. Conf. Publ. 79/10, pp. 89-93, Inst. of Eng. Aust., Canberra, ACT. |
[15] | Ma F, Ye A, Gong W et al., 2014. An estimate of human and natural contributions to flood changes of the Huai River. Global & Planetary Change, 119:39-50. |
[16] | Ma G B, Jiang W G, Li J et al., 2012. Assessment and validation of short-term flood hazards in China. Geographical Research, 31(1):34-44. (in Chinese) |
[17] | McDonnell J J, Woods R, 2004. On the need for catchment classification. Journal of Hydrology, 299(1/2):2-3. |
[18] | Mcmanamay R A, Oigbokie C O, Kao S C et al., 2016. Classification of US hydropower dams by their modes of operation. River Research and Applications, 32(7):1450-1468. |
[19] | Merz B, Dung N V, Apel H et al., 2018. Spatial coherence of flood-rich and flood-poor periods across Germany. Journal of Hydrology, 559:813-826. |
[20] | Merz R, Blöschl G, 2003. A process typology of regional floods. Water Resources Research, 39(12):1340. doi: 10.1029/2002WR001952, 2003. |
[21] |
Milly P C D, Wetherald R T, Dunne K A et al., 2002. Increasing risk of great floods in a changing climate. Nature, 415:514-517.
pmid: 11823857 |
[22] | Nied M, Schröter K, Lüdtke S et al., 2017. What are the hydro-meteorological controls on flood characteristics? Journal of Hydrology, 545:310-326. |
[23] | Ning Y, Qian M, Wang Y, 2003. Huaihe River Basin Hydrology Handbook. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese) |
[24] | Parajka J K, Ohnova S, Balint G et al., 2010. Seasonal characteristics of flood regimes across the Alpine-Carpathian range. Journal of Hydrology, 394(1/2):78-89. |
[25] | Poff N L, Allan J D, Bain M B et al., 1997. The natural flow regime: A paradigm for river conservation and restoration. Bioscience, 47(11):769-784. |
[26] | Requena A I, Chebana F, Ouarda T B, 2017. Heterogeneity measures in hydrological frequency analysis: Review and new developments. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 21(3):1651-1668. |
[27] | Richter B D, Baumgartner J V, Powell J et al., 1996. A method for assessing hydrologic alteration within ecosystems. Conservation Biology, 10(4):1163-1174. |
[28] | Robinson J S, Sivapalan M, 1997. Temporal scales and hydrological regimes: Implications for flood frequency scaling. Water Resources Research, 33(12):2981-2999. |
[29] | Rogger M, Kohl B, Pirkl H et al., 2012. Runoff models and flood frequency statistics for design flood estimation in Austria - Do they tell a consistent story? Journal of Hydrology, 456/457:30-43. |
[30] | Rosgen D L., 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena, 22(3):169-199. |
[31] | Sauquet E, Catalogne C, 2011. Comparison of catchment grouping methods for flow duration curve estimation at ungauged sites in France. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 15:2421-2435. |
[32] | Shao Q, Campbell N, 2002. Applications: Modelling trends in groundwater levels by segmented regression with constraints. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Statistics, 44(2):129-141. |
[33] | She D X, Xia J, Shao Q X et al., 2017. Advanced investigation on the change in the streamflow into the water source of the middle route of China’s water diversion project. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 122(13):6950-6951. |
[34] | Shi P, Ma X X, Hou Y B et al., 2013. Effects of land-use and climate change on hydrological processes in the upstream of Huai River, China. Water Resources Management, 27(5):1263-1278. |
[35] | Sikorska A E, Viviroli D, Seibert J, 2015. Flood-type classification in mountainous catchments using crisp and fuzzy decision trees. Water Resources Research, 51(10):7959-7976. |
[36] | Singh V P, 2015. Entropy, Theory in Hydrologic Science and Engineering. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill Education. |
[37] | Snelder T H, Biggs B J, Woods R A, 2005. Improved ecohydrological classification of rivers. River Research and Applications, 21(6):609-628. |
[38] | Sun P, Wen Q Z, Zhang Q et al., 2018. Nonstationarity evaluation of flood frequency and flood risk in the Huai River basin, China. Journal of Hydrology, 567:393-404. |
[39] | Wang W, Wei J, Shao Q et al., 2015. Spatial and temporal variations in hydro-climatic variables and runoff in response to climate change in the Luanhe River basin, China. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 29(4):1117-1133. |
[40] | Xia J, Du H, Zeng S et al., 2012a. Temporal and spatial variations and statistical models of extreme runoff in Huaihe River Basin during 1956-2010. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 22(6):1045-1060. |
[41] | Xia J, She D X, Zhang Y Y et al., 2012b. Spatial-temporal trend and statistical distribution of extreme precipitation events in Huaihe River Basin during 1960-2009. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 22(2):195-208. |
[42] | Yang P, Xia J, Zhan C S et al., 2018. Discrete wavelet transform-based investigation into the variability of standardized precipitation index in Northwest China during 1960-2014. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 132(1/2):167-180. |
[43] | Yang W Z, Zhang B W, Fu R M, 2017. A summary of flood disaster in 2016. China Flood & Drought Management, 27(1):26-29. (in Chinese) |
[44] | Zbigniew W K, Shinjiro K, Sonia I S et al., 2013. Flood risk and climate change: Global and regional perspectives. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 59(1):1-28. |
[45] | Zhang Q, Chen Y Q, Chen X H et al., 2011a. Copula-based analysis of hydrological extremes and implications of hydrological behaviors in the Pearl River basin, China. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 16(7):598-607. |
[46] | Zhang S J, Jiang Y H, Yang H J et al., 2015. An hydrology-process based method for antecedent effect rainfall determination in debris flow forecasting. Advances in Water Science, 26(1):34-43. |
[47] | Zhang Y Y, Chen Q T, 2020. Characteristics of main flood event types and their temporal-spatial variations in the upper and middle reaches of the Huai River Basin. Progress in Geography, 39(4):627-635. (in Chinese) |
[48] | Zhang Y Y, Shao Q X, Xia J et al., 2011b. Changes of flow regimes and precipitation in Huai River Basin in the last half century. Hydrological Processes, 25:246-257. |
[49] | Zhang Y Y, Shao Q X, Zhao T T G, 2017. Comprehensive assessment of dam impacts on flow regimes with consideration of interannual variations. Journal of Hydrology, 552:447-459. |
[50] | Zhang Y Y, Xia J, Bunn S E et al., 2012. Classification of flow regimes for environmental flow assessment in regulated rivers: The Huai River Basin, China. River Research and Applications, 28(7):989-1005. |
[51] |
Zhang Y Y, Zhai X Y, Shao Q X et al., 2015. Assessing temporal and spatial flow regime alterations in the regulated Huai River Basin, China. Journal of Hydrology, 529:384-397.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.08.001 |
[52] |
Zhang Y Y, Zhou Y J, Shao Q X et al., 2016. Diffuse nutrient losses and the impact factors determining their regional differences in four catchments from North to South China. Journal of Hydrology, 543:577-594.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.10.031 |
[53] | Zheng H X, Zhang L, Liu C M et al., 2007. Changes in stream flow regime in headwater catchments of the Yellow River basin since the 1950s. Hydrological Processes, 21:886-893. |
[1] | YU Jianhui, LI Jiaming, ZHANG Wenzhong. Identification and classification of resource-based cities in China [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2019, 29(8): 1300-1314. |
[2] | Kun QIAO, Wenquan ZHU, Deyong HU, Ming HAO, Shanshan CHEN, Shisong CAO. Examining the distribution and dynamics of impervious surface in different function zones in Beijing [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2018, 28(5): 669-684. |
[3] | Xiaojun YAO, Shiyin LIU, Lei HAN, Meiping SUN, Linlin ZHAO. Definition and classification system of glacial lake for inventory and hazards study [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2018, 28(2): 193-205. |
[4] | Huimin YAN, Fang LIU, Jiyuan LIU, Xiangming XIAO, Yuanwei QIN. Status of land use intensity in China and its impacts on land carrying capacity [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2017, 27(4): 387-402. |
[5] | Jiao WANG, Weiming CHENG, Chenghu ZHOU, Xinqi ZHENG. Automatic mapping of lunar landforms using DEM-derived geomorphometric parameters [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2017, 27(11): 1413-1427. |
[6] | NOJAROV Peter. Genetic climatic regionalization of the Balkan Peninsula using cluster analysis [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2017, 27(1): 43-61. |
[7] | Erfu DAI, Zhuo WU, Xiaofan WANG, Hua FU, Weimin XI, Tao PAN. Progress and prospect of research on forest landscape model [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2015, 25(1): 113-128. |
[8] | Brendon BLUE, Gary BRIERLEY, YU Guo-an. Geodiversity in the Yellow River source zone [J]. , 2013, 23(5): 775-792. |
[9] | Tami NICOLL, Gary BRIERLEY, YU Guo-an. A broad overview of landscape diversity of the Yellow River source zone [J]. , 2013, 23(5): 793-816. |
[10] | ZHAO Yan, WANG Zhiguo, SUN Baoping, ZHANG Chao, JI Qiang, FENG Lei, SHI Mingchang. A study on scheme of soil and water conservation regionalization in China [J]. , 2013, 23(4): 721-734. |
[11] | LUO Yanyun, LIU Tingxi, WANG Xixi, DUAN Limin, ZHANG Shengwei, SHI Junxiao. Landform classification using soil data and remote sensing in northern Ordos Plateau of China [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2012, 22(4): 681-698. |
[12] | CHENG Weiming, ZHOU Chenghu, LI Bingyuan, SHEN Yuancun, ZHANG Baiping. Structure and contents of layered classification system of digital geomorphology for China [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2011, 21(5): 771-790. |
[13] | ZHANG Yili, WANG Chunlian, BAI Wanqi, WANG Zhaofeng, TU Yanli, YANGJAEN Dor Gka. Alpine wetlands in the Lhasa River Basin, China [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2010, 20(3): 375-388. |
[14] | ZHANG Jianguo, LIU Shuzhen, YANG Siquan. The classification and assessment of freeze-thaw erosion in Tibet [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2007, 17(2): 165-174. |
[15] | JIANG Jianjun, ZHOU Jie, WU Hong'an, AI Li,ZHANG Hailong, ZHANG Li, XU Jun. Land cover changes in the rural-urban interaction of Xi'an region using Landsat TM/ETM data [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2005, 15(4): 423-430. |
|