HESS Opinions on the use of laboratory experimentation: "hydrologists, bring out shovels and garden hoses and hit the dirt"

33Citations
Citations of this article
88Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

From an outsider's perspective, hydrology combines field work with modelling, but mostly ignores the potential for gaining understanding and conceiving new hypotheses from controlled laboratory experiments. Sivapalan (2009) pleaded for a question- and hypothesis-driven hydrology where data analysis and top-down modelling approaches lead to general explanations and understanding of general trends and patterns. We discuss why and how such understanding is gained very effectively from controlled experimentation in comparison to field work and modelling. We argue that many major issues in hydrology are open to experimental investigations. Though experiments may have scale problems, these are of similar gravity as the well-known problems of fieldwork and modelling and have not impeded spectacular progress through experimentation in other geosciences. © 2010 Author(s).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kleinhans, M. G., Bierkens, M. F. P., & Van Der Perk, M. (2010). HESS Opinions on the use of laboratory experimentation: “hydrologists, bring out shovels and garden hoses and hit the dirt.” Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 14(2), 369–382. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-14-369-2010

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free