Short Communication: Numerically simulated  time to steady state is not a reliable  measure of landscape response time

Gasparini, Nicole M.; Forte, Adam M.; Barnhart, Katherine R.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-12-1227-2024

Articles | Volume 12, issue 6

https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-12-1227-2024

© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-12-1227-2024

© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 12, issue 6

Short communication

|

04 Nov 2024

Short communication |

| 04 Nov 2024

Short Communication: Numerically simulated time to steady state is not a reliable measure of landscape response time

Nicole M. Gasparini, Adam M. Forte, and Katherine R. Barnhart

Data sets

Input files and codes for Gasparini, Forte, and Barnhart, ESURF, 2024 [Data set] Nicole M. Gasparini, et al. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13984467

Model code and software

childmodel/child G. E. Tucker, et al. https://github.com/childmodel/child

landlab [Computer software] Eric Hutton, et al. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.595872

wschwanghart/topotoolbox Benjamin Campforts, et al. https://github.com/wschwanghart/topotoolbox

Short summary

The time it takes for a landscape to adjust to new environmental conditions is critical for understanding the impacts of past and future environmental changes. We used different computational models and methods and found that predicted times for a landscape to reach a stable condition vary greatly. Our results illustrate that reporting how timescales are measured is important. Modelers should ensure that the measurement technique addresses the question.