4.3.3 Case 4: ksn–Eavg and
ksn-q–Eavg
Evolution ofksn –Eavgand ksn-q –Eavgrelationships during the transient response are generally similar to
Case 3, but with a few exceptions. First, the disparity between final
steady state conditions for the trunk profile and network of tributaries
is significantly greater than Case 3 (Figures 6a, 6b), which reflects
the extent to which the rainfall pattern buffers variations in erosional
efficiency along the trunk. Also, inksn-q –Eavg space,
apparent erosional efficiency is more strongly affected during transient
adjustment in the tributary network compared to the trunk profile
(transient deviations from the K=Kp curve), but
also compared to Case 3. Large deviations are again restricted to drier
tributary catchments, and comparison to Case 3 expresses that changes in
rainfall have a non-linear effect (Equations 1). That said, even these
stronger effects on apparent erosional efficiency inksn-q –Eavg space are
still minor compared to representing any equivalent time in theksn –Eavgrelationship with a spatially and temporally uniform erosional
efficiency value. Finally, also like Case 3, the range of erosional
efficiency values for the trunk profile (K =
~1.8·Kp to
2.25·Kp ) are different, but in this case higher
than is implied by mean rainfall (i.e., K =
~Kp ; Figures 1b, 6a) – discussed
further in section 5.2.