Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Vegetation map of Stordalen catchment, Sweden.

Map data sources [38, 49].

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Nested subcatchments in Stordalen (borders in black) delineated using the D8 algorithm.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Boxplot of mean monthly NDVI values for the 16-day composites at 250 m resolution for the years 2006–2012 (adapted from ORNL [59]).

Annual mean NDVI for the catchment is shown with subcatchment boundaries in black overlain to annual variation across subcatchments.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Scatterplot of (a) mean annual dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentrations and (b) flow-weighted mean annual DOC against NDVI per subcatchment. The DOC regression line shows Y = -41.765x + 41.971, R2 = 0.137 and for DOCqwc Y = 0.0042x + 0.7208, R2 = 0.114.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Scatterplot of (a) mean annual dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentrations and (b) flow-weighted mean annual DOC against Slope. The DOC regression line shows Y = -0.5047x + 14.816, R2 = 0.461 and for DOCqwc Y = 0.2789x + 6.9655, R2 = 0.082.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Scatterplot of (a) mean annual dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentrations and (b) flow-weighted mean annual DOC against Elevation per subcatchment. The DOC regression line shows Y = -13.209x + 628.36, R2 = 0.374 and for DOCqwc Y = 8.853x + 408.67, R2 = 0.099.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Table 1.

Correlation matrix of average monthly DOC concentration with fixed land cover proportion per subcatchment per year together with the seasonal maximum NDVI.

Slope (n = 50), Mire (n = 50), Forest (n = 50), Lake (n = 9), NDVI (n = 50), Elevation (n = 50), and DOC (n = 218).

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

LMER model equations for DOC concentration Stordalen catchment.

Models are ranked by marginal and conditional R squared values. Slope (n = 50), Mire (n = 50), Forest (n = 50), Lake (n = 9), NDVI (n = 50), Elevation (n = 50), and DOC (n = 218).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Significance of fixed effects terms of the full model.

Slope (n = 50), Mire (n = 50), Forest (n = 50), Lake (n = 9), NDVI (n = 50), and DOC (n = 218).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Correlation of fixed effects for the full model.

Slope (n = 50), Mire (n = 50), Forest (n = 50), Lake (n = 9), NDVI (n = 50), Elevation (n = 50), and DOC (n = 218).

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 7.

Relative DOC contributions from subcatchments to riverine DOC in Stordalen from Model 1.

Coefficients and the intercept (52.9) were extrapolated from LMER Model 1 to each pixel using the fixed terms of the model equation. DOC loss (denoted in blue) occurs in lakes and where steep slopes occur with forest land cover.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Relative DOC contributions from subcatchments to riverine DOC in Stordalen from Model 2.

Coefficients and the intercept (1.4) were extrapolated from LMER Model 2 to each pixel using the fixed terms of the model equation. DOC loss (denoted in blue) occurs where lakes and forest land cover dominate.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

Relative DOC contributions from subcatchments to riverine DOC in Stordalen from Model 3.

Coefficients and the intercept (17.3) were extrapolated from LMER Model 3 to each pixel using the fixed terms of the model equation. DOC loss (denoted in blue) occurs where lakes and high elevation combine with forest land cover.

More »

Fig 9 Expand