73 research outputs found

    Comparing groups versus individuals in decision making: A systematic review protocol

    Get PDF
    Background Biodiversity management requires effective decision making at various stages. However decision making in the real world is complex, driven by multiple factors and involves a range of stakeholders. Understanding the factors that influence decision making is crucial to addressing the conflicts that arise in conservation. Decisions can be made either by individuals or by groups. This precise context has been studied extensively for several decades by behavioural economists, social psychologists and intelligence analysts. The observations from these disciplines can offer useful insights for biodiversity conservation. A systematic review on group versus individual decision making is currently lacking. This systematic review would enable us to synthesize the key insights from these disciplines for a range of scenarios useful for conservation. Methods The review will document studies that have investigated differences between group and individual decision making. The focus will be on empirical studies; the comparators in this case are decisions made by individuals while the intervention is group decision making. Outcomes include level of bias in decision outcomes or group performance. The search terms will include various combinations of the words “group”, “individual” and “decision-making”. The searches will be conducted in major publication databases, google scholar and specialist databases. Articles will be screened at the title and abstract and full text level by two reviewers. After checking for internal validity, the articles will be synthesized into subsets of decision contexts in which decision making by groups and individuals have been compared. The review process, all extracted data, original studies identified in the systematic review process and inclusion and exclusion decisions will be freely available as Additional file 1 in the final review.NM is funded by the Fondation Weiner Anspach in Belgium. WJS is funded by Arcadia. LVD was supported under the Biodiversity and Ecosystem Service Sustainability (BESS) Programme, grant code NE/K015419/1. GES is funded by The Nature Conservancy.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from BioMed Central via http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13750-016-0066-

    Conservation planning in agricultural landscapes: hotspots of conflict between agriculture and nature

    Get PDF
    Aim: Conservation conflict takes place where food production imposes a cost on wildlife conservation and vice versa. Where does conservation impose the maximum cost on production, by opposing the intensification and expansion of farmland? Where does conservation confer the maximum benefit on wildlife, by buffering and connecting protected areas with a habitable and permeable matrix of crop and non-crop habitat? Our aim was to map the costs and benefits of conservation versus production and thus to propose a conceptual framework for systematic conservation planning in agricultural landscapes. Location: World-wide. Methods: To quantify these costs and benefits, we used a geographic information system to sample the cropland of the world and map the proportion of non-crop habitat surrounding the cropland, the number of threatened vertebrates with potential to live in or move through the matrix and the yield gap of the cropland. We defined the potential for different types of conservation conflict in terms of interactions between habitat and yield (potential for expansion, intensification, both or neither). We used spatial scan statistics to find 'hotspots' of conservation conflict. Results: All of the 'hottest' hotspots of conservation conflict were in sub-Saharan Africa, which could have impacts on sustainable intensification in this region. Main conclusions: Systematic conservation planning could and should be used to identify hotspots of conservation conflict in agricultural landscapes, at multiple scales. The debate between 'land sharing' (extensive agriculture that is wildlife friendly) and 'land sparing' (intensive agriculture that is less wildlife friendly but also less extensive) could be resolved if sharing and sparing were used as different types of tool for resolving different types of conservation conflict (buffering and connecting protected areas by maintaining matrix quality, in different types of matrix). Therefore, both sharing and sparing should be prioritized in hotspots of conflict, in the context of countryside biogeography

    Poor availability of context-specific evidence hampers decision-making in conservation

    Get PDF
    Evidence-based conservation relies on reliable and relevant evidence. Practitioners often prefer locally relevant studies whose results are more likely to be transferable to the context of planned conservation interventions. To quantify the availability of relevant evidence for amphibian and bird conservation we reviewed Conservation Evidence, a database of quantitative tests of conservation interventions. Studies were geographically clustered, and few locally conducted studies were found in Western sub-Saharan Africa, Russia, South East Asia, and Eastern South America. Globally there were extremely low densities of studies per intervention - fewer than one study within 2000 km of a given location. The availability of relevant evidence was extremely low when we restricted studies to those studying biomes or taxonomic orders containing high percentages of threatened species, compared to the most frequently studied biomes and taxonomic orders. Further constraining the evidence by study design showed that only 17–20% of amphibian and bird studies used reliable designs. Our results highlight the paucity of evidence on the effectiveness of conservation interventions, and the disparity in evidence for local contexts that are frequently studied and those where conservation needs are greatest. Addressing the serious global shortfall in context-specific evidence requires a step change in the frequency of testing conservation interventions, greater use of reliable study designs and standardized metrics, and methodological advances to analyze patchy evidence bases

    3D-electrical resistivity tomography monitoring of salt transport in homogeneous and layered soil samples

    Get PDF
    Monitoring transport of dissolved substances in soil deposits is particularly relevant where safety is concerned, as in the case of geo-environmental barriers. Geophysical methods are very appealing, since they cover a wide domain, localising possible preferential flow paths and providing reliable links between geophysical quantities and hydrological variables. This paper describes a 3D laboratory application of Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) used to monitor solute transport processes. Dissolution and transport tests on both homogeneous and heterogeneous samples were conducted in an instrumented oedometer cell. ERT was used to create maps of electrical conductivity of the monitored domain at different time intervals and to estimate concentration variations within the interstitial fluid. Comparisons with finite element simulations of the transport processes were performed to check the consistency of the results. Tests confirmed that the technique can monitor salt transport, infer the hydro-chemical behaviour of heterogeneous geomaterials and evaluate the performances of clay barrier

    Controlling behavior, power relations within intimate relationships and intimate partner physical and sexual violence against women in Nigeria

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Controlling behavior is more common and can be equally or more threatening than physical or sexual violence. This study sought to determine the role of husband/partner controlling behavior and power relations within intimate relationships in the lifetime risk of physical and sexual violence in Nigeria.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This study used secondary data from a cross-sectional nationally-representative survey collected by face-to-face interviews from women aged 15 - 49 years in the 2008 Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey. Utilizing a stratified two-stage cluster sample design, data was collected frrm 19 216 eligible with the DHS domestic violence module, which is based on the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine the role of husband/partner controlling behavior in the risk of ever experiencing physical and sexual violence among 2877 women aged 15 - 49 years who were currently or formerly married or cohabiting with a male partner.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Women who reported controlling behavior by husband/partner had a higher likelihood of experiencing physical violence (RR = 3.04; 95% CI: 2.50 - 3.69), and women resident in rural areas and working in low status occupations had increased likelihood of experiencing physical IPV. Controlling behavior by husband/partner was associated with higher likelihood of experiencing physical violence (RR = 4.01; 95% CI: 2.54 - 6.34). In addition, women who justified wife beating and earned more than their husband/partner were at higher likelihood of experiencing physical and sexual violence. In contrast, women who had decision-making autonomy had lower likelihood of experiencing physical and sexual violence.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Controlling behavior by husband/partner significantly increases the likelihood of physical and sexual IPV, thus acting as a precursor to violence. Findings emphasize the need to adopt a proactive integrated approach to controlling behavior and intimate partner violence within the society.</p

    Stochastic upscaling of hydrodynamic dispersion and retardation factor in a physically and chemically heterogeneous tropical soil

    Full text link
    [EN] Stochastic upscaling of flow and reactive solute transport in a tropical soil is performed using real data collected in the laboratory. Upscaling of hydraulic conductivity, longitudinal hydrodynamic dispersion, and retardation factor were done using three different approaches of varying complexity. How uncertainty propagates after upscaling was also studied. The results show that upscaling must be taken into account if a good reproduction of the flow and transport behavior of a given soil is to be attained when modeled at larger than laboratory scales. The results also show that arrival time uncertainty was well reproduced after solute transport upscaling. This work represents a first demonstration of flow and reactive transport upscaling in a soil based on laboratory data. It also shows how simple upscaling methods can be incorporated into daily modeling practice using commercial flow and transport codes.The authors thank the financial support by the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) (Project 401441/2014-8). The doctoral fellowship award to the first author by the Coordination of Improvement of Higher Level Personnel (CAPES) is acknowledged. The first author also thanks the international mobility grant awarded by CNPq, through the Sciences Without Borders program (Grant Number: 200597/2015-9). The international mobility grant awarded by Santander Mobility in cooperation with the University of Sao Paulo is also acknowledged. DHI-WASI is gratefully thanked for providing a FEFLOW license.Almeida De-Godoy, V.; Zuquette, L.; Gómez-Hernández, JJ. (2019). Stochastic upscaling of hydrodynamic dispersion and retardation factor in a physically and chemically heterogeneous tropical soil. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment. 33(1):201-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-018-1624-zS201216331Ahuja LR, Naney JW, Green RE, Nielsen DR (1984) Macroporosity to characterize spatial variability of hydraulic conductivity and effects of land management. Soil Sci Soc Am J 48:699. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1984.03615995004800040001xBellin A, Lawrence AE, Rubin Y (2004) Models of sub-grid variability in numerical simulations of solute transport in heterogeneous porous formations: three-dimensional flow and effect of pore-scale dispersion. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 18:31–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-003-0164-2Brent RP (1973) Algorithms for minimization without derivatives. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsBrusseau ML (1998) Non-ideal transport of reactive solutes in heterogeneous porous media: 3. model testing and data analysis using calibration versus prediction. J Hydrol 209:147–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(98)00121-8Brusseau ML, Srivastava R (1999) Nonideal transport of reactive solutes in heterogeneous porous media: 4. Analysis of the cape cod natural-gradient field experiment. Water Resour Res 35:1113–1125. https://doi.org/10.1029/1998WR900019Brutsaert W (1967) Some methods of calculating unsaturated permeability. Trans ASAE 10:400–404Cadini F, De Sanctis J, Bertoli I, Zio E (2013) Upscaling of a dual-permeability Monte Carlo simulation model for contaminant transport in fractured networks by genetic algorithm parameter identification. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 27:505–516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-012-0595-8Cambardella CA, Moorman TB, Parkin TB, Karlen DL, Novak JM, Turco RF, Konopka AE (1994) Field-scale variability of soil properties in central iowa soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 58:1501. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1994.03615995005800050033xCapilla JE, Rodrigo J, Gómez-Hernández JJ (1999) Simulation of non-Gaussian transmissivity fields honoring piezometric data and integrating soft and secondary information. Math Geol 31:907–927. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007580902175Cassiraga EF, Fernàndez-Garcia D, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2005) Performance assessment of solute transport upscaling methods in the context of nuclear waste disposal. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 42:756–764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2005.03.013Corey AT (1977) Mechanics of heterogeneous fluids in porous media. Water Resources Publications, Fort Collins, CO, p 259Dagan G (1989) Flow and transport in porous formations. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-75015-1Dagan G (2004) On application of stochastic modeling of groundwater flow and transport. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-004-0191-7de Azevedo AAB, Pressinotti MMN, Massoli M (1981) Sedimentological studies of the Botucatu and Pirambóia formations in the region of Santa Rita do Passa Quatro (In portuguese). Rev do Inst Geológico 2:31–38. https://doi.org/10.5935/0100-929X.19810003Deng H, Dai Z, Wolfsberg AV, Ye M, Stauffer PH, Lu Z, Kwicklis E (2013) Upscaling retardation factor in hierarchical porous media with multimodal reactive mineral facies. Chemosphere 91:248–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.10.105Diersch H-JG (2014) Finite element modeling of flow, mass and heat transport in porous and fractured media. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38739-5Dippenaar MA (2014) Porosity reviewed: quantitative multi-disciplinary understanding, recent advances and applications in vadose zone hydrology. Geotech Geol Eng 32:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-013-9704-9Fagundes JRT, Zuquette LV (2011) Sorption behavior of the sandy residual unconsolidated materials from the sandstones of the Botucatu Formation, the main aquifer of Brazil. Environ Earth Sci 62:831–845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0570-yFenton GA, Griffiths DV (2008) Risk assessment in geotechnical engineering. Wiley, p 463Fernàndez-Garcia D, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2007) Impact of upscaling on solute transport: Traveltimes, scale dependence of dispersivity, and propagation of uncertainty. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004727Fernàndez-Garcia D, Llerar-Meza G, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2009) Upscaling transport with mass transfer models: mean behavior and propagation of uncertainty. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR007764Feyen L, Gómez-Hernández JJ, Ribeiro PJ, Beven KJ, De Smedt F (2003a) A Bayesian approach to stochastic capture zone delineation incorporating tracer arrival times, conductivity measurements, and hydraulic head observations. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2002WR001544Feyen L, Ribeiro PJ, Gómez-Hernández JJ, Beven KJ, De Smedt F (2003b) Bayesian methodology for stochastic capture zone delineation incorporating transmissivity measurements and hydraulic head observations. J Hydrol 271:156–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(02)00314-1Forsythe GE, Malcolm MA, Moler CB (1976) Computer methods for mathematical computations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, p 259Freeze R, Cherry J (1979) Groundwater. PrenticeHall Inc, Englewood cliffs, p 604Frippiat CC, Holeyman AE (2008) A comparative review of upscaling methods for solute transport in heterogeneous porous media. J Hydrol 362:150–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.08.015Fu J, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2009) Uncertainty assessment and data worth in groundwater flow and mass transport modeling using a blocking Markov chain Monte Carlo method. J Hydrol 364:328–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.11.014Gelhar LW, Axness CL (1983) Three-dimensional stochastic analysis of macrodispersion in aquifers. Water Resour Res 19:161–180. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR019i001p00161Gelhar LW, Welty C, Rehfeldt KR (1992) A critical review of data on field-scale dispersion in aquifers. Water Resour Res 28:1955–1974. https://doi.org/10.1029/92WR00607Giacheti HL, Rohm SA, Nogueira JB, Cintra JCA (1993) Geotechnical properties of the Cenozoic sediment (in protuguese). In: Albiero JH, Cintra JCA (eds) Soil from the interior of São Paulo. ABMS, Sao Paulo, pp 143–175Gómez-Hernandez JJ (1990) A stochastic approach to the simulation of block conductivity fields conditional upon data measured at a smaller scale. Stanford University, StanfordGómez-Hernández JJ, Gorelick SM (1989) Effective groundwater model parameter values: influence of spatial variabiity of hydraulic conductivity, leackance, and recharge. Water Resour Res 25:405–419Gómez-Hernández JJ, Journel A (1993) Joint sequential simulation of multigaussian fields. In: Geostatistics Tróia’92. pp 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-1739-5_8Gómez-Hernández JJ, Wen X-H (1994) Probabilistic assessment of travel times in groundwater modeling. Stoch Hydrol Hydraul 8:19–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01581389Gómez-Hernández JJ, Fu J, Fernandez-Garcia D (2006) Upscaling retardation factors in 2-D porous media. In: Bierkens MFP, Gehrels JC, Kovar K (eds) Calibration and reliability in groundwater modelling: from uncertainty to decision making: proceedings of the ModelCARE 2005 conference held in The Hague, The Netherlands, 6–9 June, 2005. IAHS Publication, pp 130–136Goovaerts P (1999) Geostatistics in soil science: state-of-the-art and perspectives. Geoderma 89:1–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7061(98)00078-0Jarvis NJ (2007) A review of non-equilibrium water fl ow and solute transport in soil macropores: principles, controlling factors and consequences for water quality. Eur J Soil Sci 58:523–546. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss2011-050Jellali S, Diamantopoulos E, Kallali H, Bennaceur S, Anane M, Jedidi N (2010) Dynamic sorption of ammonium by sandy soil in fixed bed columns: evaluation of equilibrium and non-equilibrium transport processes. J Environ Manag 91:897–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.11.006Journel AG, Gomez-Hernandez JJ (1993) Stochastic imaging of the wilmington clastic sequence. SPE Form Eval 8:33–40. https://doi.org/10.2118/19857-PAJournel A, Deutsch C, Desbarats A (1986) Power averaging for block effective permeability. Proc SPE Calif Reg Meet. https://doi.org/10.2118/15128-MSKronberg BI, Fyfe WS, Leonardos OH, Santos AM (1979) The chemistry of some Brazilian soils: element mobility during intense weathering. Chem Geol 24:211–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2541(79)90124-4Lake LW (1988) The origins of anisotropy (includes associated papers 18394 and 18458). J Pet Technol 40:395–396. https://doi.org/10.2118/17652-PALawrence AE, Rubin Y (2007) Block-effective macrodispersion for numerical simulations of sorbing solute transport in heterogeneous porous formations. Adv Water Resour 30:1272–1285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2006.11.005Lemke LD, Barrack WA II, Abriola LM, Goovaerts P (2004) Matching solute breakthrough with deterministic and stochastic aquifer models. Groundwater 42:920–934Li L, Zhou H, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2011a) A comparative study of three-dimensional hydraulic conductivity upscaling at the macro-dispersion experiment (MADE) site, Columbus Air Force Base, Mississippi (USA). J Hydrol 404:278–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.05.001Li L, Zhou H, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2011b) Transport upscaling using multi-rate mass transfer in three-dimensional highly heterogeneous porous media. Adv Water Resour 34:478–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2011.01.001Logsdon Keller KE, Moorman TB (2002) Measured and predicted solute leaching from multiple undisturbed soil columns. Soil Sci Soc Am J 66:686–695. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2002.6860Lourens A, van Geer FC (2016) Uncertainty propagation of arbitrary probability density functions applied to upscaling of transmissivities. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 30:237–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-015-1075-8Mahapatra IC, Singh KN, Pillai KG, Bapat SR (1985) Rice soils and their management. Indian J Agron 30:R1–R41Morakinyo JA, Mackay R (2006) Geostatistical modelling of ground conditions to support the assessment of site contamination. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 20:106–118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-005-0015-4Moslehi M, de Barros FPJ, Ebrahimi F, Sahimi M (2016) Upscaling of solute transport in disordered porous media by wavelet transformations. Adv Water Resour 96:180–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2016.07.013Osinubi KJ, Nwaiwu CM (2005) Hydraulic conductivity of compacted lateritic soil. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 131:1034–1041. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:8(1034)Remy N (2004) SGeMS: stanford geostatistical modeling software. Softw Man. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-3610-1_89Renard P, de Marsily G (1997) Calculating equivalent permeability: a review. Adv Water Resour 20:253–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1708(96)00050-4Robin MJL, Sudicky EA, Gillham RW, Kachanoski RG (1991) Spatial variability of strontium distribution coefficients and their correlation with hydraulic conductivity in the Canadian forces base borden aquifer. Water Resour Res 27:2619–2632. https://doi.org/10.1029/91WR01107Salamon P, Fernàndez-Garcia D, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2007) Modeling tracer transport at the MADE site: the importance of heterogeneity. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006WR005522Sánchez-Vila X, Carrera J, Girardi JP (1996) Scale effects in transmissivity. J Hydrol 183:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(96)80031-XScheibe T, Yabusaki S (1998) Scaling of flow and transport behavior in heterogeneous groundwater systems. Adv Water Resour 22:223–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1708(98)00014-1Selvadurai PA, Selvadurai APS (2014) On the effective permeability of a heterogeneous porous medium: the role of the geometric mean. Philos Mag 94:2318–2338. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786435.2014.913111Shackelford CD (1994) Critical concepts for column testing. J Geotech Eng 120:1804–1828. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(95)96996-OŠimůnek J, van Genuchten MT, Šejna M, Toride N, Leij FJ (1999) The STANMOD computer software for evaluating solute transport in porous media using analytical solutions of convection-dispersion equation. Riverside, CaliforniaTaskinen A, Sirviö H, Bruen M (2008) Modelling effects of spatial variability of saturated hydraulic conductivity on autocorrelated overland flow data: linear mixed model approach. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 22:67–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-006-0099-5Tuli A, Hopmans JW, Rolston DE, Moldrup P (2005) Comparison of air and water permeability between disturbed and undisturbed soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 69:1361. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.0332Tyukhova AR, Willmann M (2016) Conservative transport upscaling based on information of connectivity. Water Resour Res 52:6867–6880. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR018331van Genuchten MTh (1980) Determining transport parameters from solute displacement experiments. Research Report 118. U.S. Salinity Lab., Riverside, CAVanderborght J, Timmerman A, Feyen J (2000) Solute transport for steady-state and transient flow in soils with and without macropores. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:1305–1317. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2000.6441305xVanmarcke E (2010) Random fields: analysis and synthesis. World Scientific. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, p 364Vishal V, Leung JY (2017) Statistical scale-up of 3D particle-tracking simulation for non-Fickian dispersive solute transport modeling. Environ Res Risk Assess, Stoch. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-017-1501-1Wen X-H, Gómez-Hernández JJ (1996) Upscaling hydraulic conductivities in heterogeneous media: an overview. J Hydrol 183:ix–xxxii. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(96)80030-8Wen XH, Gómez-Hernández JJ (1998) Numerical modeling of macrodispersion in heterogeneous media: a comparison of multi-Gaussian and non-multi-Gaussian models. J Contam Hydrol 30:129–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7722(97)00035-1Wen XH, Capilla JE, Deutsch CV, Gómez-Hernández JJ, Cullick AS (1999) A program to create permeability fields that honor single-phase flow rate and pressure data. Comput Geosci 25:217–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-3004(98)00126-5Wilding LP, Drees LR (1983) Spatial variability and pedology. In: Wilding LP, Smeck NE, Hall GF (eds) Pedogenesis and soil taxonomy: the soil orders. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 83–116Willmann M, Carrera J, Guadagnini A (2006) Block-upscaling of transport in heterogeneous aquifers. h2ogeo.upc.edu 1–7Xu Z, Meakin P (2013) Upscaling of solute transport in heterogeneous media with non-uniform flow and dispersion fields. Appl Math Model 37:8533–8542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.03.070Zech A, Attinger S, Cvetkovic V, Dagan G, Dietrich P, Fiori A, Rubin Y, Teutsch G (2015) Is unique scaling of aquifer macrodispersivity supported by field data? Water Resour Res 51:7662–7679. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017220Zhou H, Li L, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2010) Three-dimensional hydraulic conductivity upscaling in groundwater modeling. Comput Geosci 36:1224–1235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2010.03.008Zhou H, Li L, Hendricks Franssen H-J, Gómez-Hernández JJ (2012) Pattern recognition in a bimodal aquifer using the normal-score ensemble Kalman filter. Math Geosci 44:169–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11004-011-9372-
    corecore