↓ Skip to main content

Capture Versus Capture Zones: Clarifying Terminology Related to Sources of Water to Wells

Overview of attention for article published in Ground Water, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Capture Versus Capture Zones: Clarifying Terminology Related to Sources of Water to Wells
Published in
Ground Water, April 2018
DOI 10.1111/gwat.12661
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul M. Barlow, Stanley A. Leake, Michael N. Fienen

Abstract

The term capture, related to the source of water derived from wells, has been used in two distinct yet related contexts by the hydrologic community. The first is a water-budget context, in which capture refers to decreases in the rates of groundwater outflow and (or) increases in the rates of recharge along head-dependent boundaries of an aquifer in response to pumping. The second is a transport context, in which capture zone refers to the specific flowpaths that define the three-dimensional, volumetric portion of a groundwater flow field that discharges to a well. A closely related issue that has become associated with the source of water to wells is streamflow depletion, which refers to the reduction in streamflow caused by pumping, and is a type of capture. Rates of capture and streamflow depletion are calculated by use of water-budget analyses, most often with groundwater-flow models. Transport models, particularly particle-tracking methods, are used to determine capture zones to wells. In general, however, transport methods are not useful for quantifying actual or potential streamflow depletion or other types of capture along aquifer boundaries. To clarify the sometimes subtle differences among these terms, we describe the processes and relations among capture, capture zones, and streamflow depletion, and provide proposed terminology to distinguish among them.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Master 9 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Professor 3 5%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 15 26%
Engineering 15 26%
Environmental Science 8 14%
Computer Science 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 16 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 April 2018.
All research outputs
#16,626,022
of 24,458,924 outputs
Outputs from Ground Water
#731
of 879 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,309
of 331,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ground Water
#7
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,458,924 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 879 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.