Table 1 Properties of the lakes included in the present study with lakes ranked according to increasing altitude (first column) and volume (second column).

From: The vulnerability of lakes to climate change along an altitudinal gradient

# Rank		Lake	Area	Altitude	Volume	Depth	Mixing regime		Trophic	Station
Altitude	Volume		(km²)	(m a.s.l.)	(km³)	(m)	1982–2010	2071–2099	State
1	27	L. Maggiore	212.51	193	37	372	Monomictic	Monomictic	Oligotrophic	OTL
2	18	Lower L. Lugano	20	271	1.14	95	Monomictic	Monomictic	Eutrophic	LUG
3	24	Upper L. Lugano	27.3	271	4.69	288	Monomictic	Monomictic	Eutrophic	LUG
4	29	L. Geneva	582.21	372	89	309	Monomictic	Monomictic	Mesotrophic	PUY
5	16	Lower L. Constance	26.59	395	0.8	47	Monomictic	Monomictic	Mesotrophic	GUT
6	28	Upper L. Constance	481.72	395	47.6	253	Monomictic	Monomictic	Mesotrophic	GUT
7	21	Lower L. Zürich	66.6	406	3.36	136	Monomictic	Monomictic	Mesotrophic	WAE
8	14	Upper L. Zürich	20.3	406	0.47	45	Monomictic	Monomictic	Mesotrophic	WAE
9	19	Walensee	24.14	419	2.5	151	Monomictic	Monomictic	Oligotrophic	GLA
10	1	Rotsee	0.47	419	0.0038	16	Monomictic	Monomictic	Eutrophic	LUZ
11	17	L. Biel	39.3	429	1.12	73	Monomictic	Monomictic	Eutrophic	NEU
12	15	L. Murten	23	429	0.55	45	Monomictic	Monomictic	Mesotrophic	NEU
13	26	L. Neuchâtel	217.9	429	13.77	154	Monomictic	Monomictic	Mesotrophic	NEU
14	8	L. Alpnach	4.76	434	0.1	34	Dimictic	Monomictic	Oligotrophic	LUZ
15	23	L. Lucerne, Gersauer Becken	30.27	434	4.41	214	Monomictic	Monomictic	Oligotrophic	ALT
16	22	L. Lucerne, Kreuztrichter	58.92	434	4.35	151	Monomictic	Monomictic	Oligotrophic	LUZ
17	20	L. Lucerne, Urnersee	22	434	3.16	200	Monomictic	Monomictic	Oligotrophic	ALT
18	13	Greifensee	8.45	435	0.15	33	Monomictic	Monomictic	Eutrophic	SMA
19	7	Pfäffikersee	3.2	537	0.059	36	Dimictic	Dimictic/Monomictic	Mesotrophic	SMA
20	25	L. Brienz	29.8	564	5.17	260	Monomictic	Monomictic	Oligotrophic	INT
21	6	Klöntalersee	3.3	848	0.056	45	Dimictic	Monomictic	Mesotrophic	GLA
22	9	Lago di Poschiavo	1.98	962	0.12	85	Monomictic	Monomictic	Oligotrophic	ROB
23	12	Lac de Joux	8.77	1004	0.145	32	Dimictic	Dimictic/Monomictic	Oligotrophic	CHB:FRE
24	5	Lac de l’Hongrin	1.6	1250	0.0532	105	Monomictic	Monomictic	Oligotrophic	CHD:MLS
25	2	L. Davos	0.59	1558	0.0156	54	Dimictic	Monomictic	Oligotrophic	DAV
26	4	Oeschinensee	1.16	1578	0.0402	55	Monomictic	Monomictic	Eutrophic	ABO
27	3	L. St. Moritz	0.78	1768	0.02	44	Dimictic	Dimictic	Mesotrophic	SAM
28	11	L. Silvaplana	2.71	1791	0.14	78	Dimictic	Dimictic/Monomictic	Oligotrophic	SIA:SAM
29	10	L. Sils	4.11	1797	0.137	71	Dimictic	Dimictic/Monomictic	Oligotrophic	SIA:SAM

The dominant mixing regimes, defined as the regime occurring in the majority of simulated years, are given for the reference (1982–2010) and future (2071–2099) periods, bold text indicates a regime shift. Multiple regimes indicate different regimes for individual RCPs. Meteorological stations used for RCM downscaling are listed at far right. Multiple stations were combined due to missing data for individual stations (see Supporting Information).

Back to article page

Table 1 Properties of the lakes included in the present study with lakes ranked according to increasing altitude (first column) and volume (second column).

Search

Quick links