Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Analysis
  • Published:

Controls on runoff processes in forested catchments worldwide

Nature Water volume 4, pages 102–114 (2026)Cite this article

Subjects

A Publisher Correction to this article was published on 15 January 2026

This article has been updated

Abstract

Forested catchments are ‘hydrological hotspots’ in the world as they act as major sources of high-quality water on Earth and provide essential ecosystem services. Understanding their hydrological functioning is therefore critical for effective land, water and forest management. While field and modelling studies have often focused on individual catchments or multisite intercomparisons, a global analysis of runoff processes in forested catchments is currently lacking, limiting our understanding of how biotic and abiotic factors interact to control these processes across the world. Here data are synthesized from 691 globally distributed forested catchments to identify the main controls on runoff processes, streamflow response and streamflow prediction and assess how these controls vary with climate. Using this global dataset, seven classic hypotheses and an original one are tested. The results corroborate some theories while challenging others, offering new, process-based insights into the intertwined factors controlling runoff generation in forested catchments worldwide.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Descriptive information of the studies included in the database.
Fig. 2: Distribution, number and size of the study catchments.
Fig. 3: Occurrence of threshold processes related to different hydrological variables and maximum contribution to streamflow of different components.
Fig. 4: Occurrence of runoff processes and associated MAP.
Fig. 5: Controls on runoff processes, magnitude of streamflow response, and streamflow prediction.
Fig. 6: Fractions of controls on runoff processes.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The full dataset is publicly available via Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15123553 (ref. 83).

Change history

References

  1. Bourgoin, C. et al. Mapping Global Forest Cover of the Year 2020 to Support the EU Regulation on Deforestation-Free Supply Chains (Publications Office of the European Union, 2024).

  2. Keleş, S. An assessment of hydrological functions of forest ecosystems to support sustainable forest management. J. Sustain. For. 38, 305–326 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Caldwell, V. et al. Forested watersheds provide the highest water quality among all land cover types, but the benefit of this ecosystem service depends on landscape context. Sci. Total Environ. 882, 163550 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Larsen, M. C. Forested watersheds, water resources, and ecosystem services, with examples from the United States, Panama, and Puerto Rico. In Chemistry and Water (ed. Ahuja, S.) 161–182 (Elsevier, 2017).

  5. Food and Agriculture Organization and UN Environment Programme. The State of the World’s Forests 2020. Forests, Biodiversity and People (FAO and UNEP, 2020).

  6. Barthold, F. K. & Woods, R. A. Stormflow generation: a meta-analysis of field evidence from small, forested catchments. Water Resour. Res. 51, 3730–3753 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Pfister, L. et al. Bedrock geology controls on catchment storage, mixing, and release: a comparative analysis of 16 nested catchments. Hydrol. Process. 31, 1828–1845 (2017).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bates, C. G. & Henry, A. J. Forest and streamflow experiment at Wagon Wheel Gap, Colorado. Mon. Weather Rev. Suppl. 30, 1–79 (1928).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kittredge, J. Forest Influences: the Effects of Woody Vegetation on Climate, Water and Soil, with Applications to the Conservation of Water and the Control of Floods and Erosion (McGraw Hill, 1948).

  10. Hewlett, J. D. & Hibbert, A. R. Moisture and energy conditions within a sloping soil mass during drainage. J. Geophys. Res. 68, 1081–1087 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hewlett, J. D. & Hibbert, A. R. Factors affecting the response of small watersheds to precipitation in humid areas. In International Syposium on Forest Hydrology (eds Sopper, W. E. & Lull, H. W.) 275–290 (Pergamon, 1967).

  12. Andréassian, V. Waters and forests: from historical controversy to scientific debate. J. Hydrol. 291, 1–27 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Post, A. & Jones, J. A. Hydrologic regimes of forested, mountainous, headwater basins in New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, and Puerto Rico. Adv. Water Resour. 24, 1195–1210 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Piovano, T. et al. Contrasting storage-flux-age interactions revealed by catchment inter-comparison using a tracer-aided runoff model. J. Hydrol. 590, 125226 (2020).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Wlostowski, A. N. et al. Signatures of hydrologic function across the Critical Zone Observatory network. Water Resour. Res. 57, e2019WR026635 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zhang, L. et al. CHOSEN: a synthesis of hydrometeorological data from intensively monitored catchments and comparative analysis of hydrologic extremes. Hydrol. Process. 35, e14429 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  17. McMillan, H., Araki, R., Gnann, S., Woods, R. & Wagener, T. How do hydrologists perceive watersheds? A survey and analysis of perceptual model figures for experimental watersheds. Hydrol. Process. 37, e14845 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Penna, D. A recipe for why and how to set up and sustain an experimental catchment. Hydrol. Process. 38, e15163 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Blöschl, G. Hydrologic synthesis: across processes, places, and scales. Water Resour. Res. 42, W03S02 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kirchner, J. W. Aggregation in environmental systems. Part 1: seasonal tracer cycles quantify young water fractions, but not mean transit times, in spatially heterogeneous catchments. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 20, 279–297 (2016).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Kirchner, J. W. Getting the right answers for the right reasons: linking measurements, analyses, and models to advance the science of hydrology. Water Resour. Res. 42, W03S04 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Pfister, L. & Kirchner, J. W. Debates—hypothesis testing in hydrology: theory and practice. Water Resour. Res. 53, 1792–1798 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  23. McMillan, H. K. A review of hydrologic signatures and their applications. WIREs Water 8, e1499 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Zarei, M. & Destouni, G. A. A global multi catchment and multi dataset synthesis for water fluxes and storage changes on land. Sci. Data 11, 1333 (2024).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Chen, L. & Wang, L. Recent advance in earth observation big data for hydrology. Big Earth Data 2, 86–107 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fisher, R. A. & Koven, C. D. Perspectives on the future of land surface models and the challenges of representing complex terrestrial systems. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 12, e2018MS001453 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Barbeta, A. & Peñuelas, J. Relative contribution of groundwater to plant transpiration estimated with stable isotopes. Sci. Rep. 7, 10580 (2017).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Fan, Y., Miguez-Macho, G., Jobbágy, E. G., Jackson, R. B. & Otero-Casal, C. Hydrologic regulation of plant rooting depth. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 10572–10577 (2017).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Miguez-Macho, G. & Fan, Y. Spatiotemporal origin of soil water taken up by vegetation. Nature 598, 624–628 (2021).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Fan, Y., Li, H. & Miguez-Macho, G. Global patterns of groundwater table depth. Science 339, 940–943 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Jasechko, S. Global isotope hydrogeology―review. Rev. Geophys. 57, 835–965 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Jasechko, S. & Perrone, D. Global groundwater wells at risk of running dry. Science 372, 418–421 (2021).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhang, M. et al. A global review on hydrological responses to forest change across multiple spatial scales: importance of scale, climate, forest type and hydrological regime. J. Hydrol. 546, 44–59 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Peel, M. C., McMahon, T. A. & Finlayson, B. L. Vegetation impact on mean annual evapotranspiration at a global catchment scale. Water Resour. Res. 46, W09508 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Chen, Z., Wang, W., Woods, R. A. & Shao, Q. Hydrological effects of change in vegetation components across global catchments. J. Hydrol. 595, 125775 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Liu, Q. et al. Shift in precipitation–streamflow relationship induced by multi-year drought across global catchments. Sci. Total Environ. 857, 159560 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Vu, T., Kiesel, J., Guse, B., Domisch, S. & Fohrer, N. Disentangling spatio-temporal impacts of multiple environmental factors on the global discharge regime. Earths Future 12, e2023EF004267 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Penna, D. & van Meerveld, H. J. Spatial variability in the isotopic composition of water in small catchments and its effect on hydrograph separation. WIREs Water 6, e1367 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Jasechko, S. et al. Substantial proportion of global streamflow less than three months old. Nat. Geosci. 9, 126–129 (2016).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. McMillan, H. et al. Global patterns in observed hydrologic processes. Nat. Water 3, 497–506 (2025).

  41. Ali, G. et al. Towards a unified threshold-based hydrological theory: necessary components and recurring challenges. Hydrol. Process. 27, 313–318 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Branger, F. & McMillan, H. K. Deriving hydrological signatures from soil moisture data. Hydrol. Process. 34, 1410–1427 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Buttle, J. M. Isotope hydrograph separations and rapid delivery of pre-event water from drainage basins. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 18, 16–41 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Horton, R. E. Hydrologic interrelations of water and soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1, 401–429 (1937).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Bonell, M. Progress in the understanding of runoff generation dynamics in forests. J. Hydrol. 150, 217–275 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Peters, D. L., Buttle, J. M., Taylor, C. H. & LaZerte, B. D. Runoff production in a forested, shallow soil, Canadian shield basin. Water Resour. Res. 31, 1291–1304 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Weiler, M., McDonnell, J. J., Tromp-van Meerveld, I. & Uchida, T. in Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences (eds Anderson, M. G. & McDonnell, J. J.) 1–14 (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2006).

  48. Beven, K. & Germann, P. Macropores and water flow in soils revisited. Water Resour. Res. 49, 3071–3092 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  49. McGuire, K. J., Klaus, J. & Jackson, C. R. James Buttle review: interflow, subsurface stormflow and throughflow: a synthesis of field work and modelling. Hydrol. Process. 38, e15263 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Blume, T. & van Meerveld, H. J. From hillslope to stream: methods to investigate subsurface connectivity. WIREs Water 2, 177–198 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Freeze, R. A. Streamflow generation. Rev. Geophys. 12, 627–647 (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Dunne, T. Formation and controls of channel networks. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 4, 211–239 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Fenicia, F., McDonnell, J. J. & Savenije, H. H. G. Learning from model improvement: on the contribution of complementary data to process understanding. Water Resour. Res. 44, W06419 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Fenicia, F., Kavetski, D. & Savenije, H. H. G. Elements of a flexible approach for conceptual hydrological modeling: 1. Motivation and theoretical development. Water Resour. Res. 47, W11510 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Savenije, H. H. G. HESS opinions ‘topography driven conceptual modelling (FLEX-Topo)’. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 14, 2681–2692 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Montanari, A. What do we mean by ‘uncertainty’? The need for a consistent wording about uncertainty assessment in hydrology. Hydrol. Process. 21, 841–845 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Montanari, A., Shoemaker, C. A. & van de Giesen, N. Introduction to special section on uncertainty assessment in surface and subsurface hydrology: an overview of issues and challenges. Water Resour. Res. 45, W00B00 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  58. McDonnell, J. J., Spence, C., Karran, D. J., van Meerveld, H. J. & Harman, C. J. Fill-and-spill: a process description of runoff generation at the scale of the beholder. Water Resour. Res. 57, e2020WR027514 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Penna, D. et al. Seasonal changes in runoff generation in a small forested mountain catchment. Hydrol. Process. 29, 2027–2042 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  60. von Freyberg, J., Studer, B., Rinderer, M. & Kirchner, J. W. Studying catchment storm response using event- and pre-event-water volumes as fractions of precipitation rather than discharge. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 22, 5847–5865 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Anderson, A. E., Weiler, M., Alila, Y. & Hudson, R. O. Dye staining and excavation of a lateral preferential flow network. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 13, 935–944 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Jencso, K. G. & McGlynn, B. L. Hierarchical controls on runoff generation: topographically driven hydrologic connectivity, geology, and vegetation. Water Resour. Res. 47, W11527 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Emanuel, R. E., Hazen, A. G., McGlynn, B. L. & Jencso, K. G. Vegetation and topographic influences on the connectivity of shallow groundwater between hillslopes and streams. Ecohydrology 7, 887–895 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Horton, R. E. The role of infiltration in the hydrologic cycle. Eos14, 446–460 (1933).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Seneviratne, S. I. et al. Investigating soil moisture-climate interactions in a changing climate: a review. Earth Sci. Rev. 99, 125–161 (2010).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Freer, J. et al. Hydrological processes—letters. Topographic controls on subsurface storm flow at the hillslope scale for two hydrologically distinct small catchments. Hydrol. Process. 11, 1347–1352 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  67. James, A. L. & Roulet, N. T. Antecedent moisture conditions and catchment morphology as controls on spatial patterns of runoff generation in small forest catchments. J. Hydrol. 377, 351–366 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Penna, D., Tromp-van Meerveld, H. J., Gobbi, A., Borga, M. & Dalla Fontana, G. The influence of soil moisture on threshold runoff generation processes in an alpine headwater catchment. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 15, 689–702 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  69. McMillan, S. K. et al. Before the storm: antecedent conditions as regulators of hydrologic and biogeochemical response to extreme climate events. Biogeochemistry 141, 487–501 (2018).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Massari, C. et al. On the relation between proxies of pre-strom catchment conditions and runoff coefficient for European floods. J. Hydrol. 625, 130012 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Vichta, T. et al. Combined effects of rainfall–runoff events and antecedent soil moisture on runoff generation processes in an upland forested headwater area. Hydrol. Process. 38, e15216 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Savenije, H. H. G. The hydrological system as a living organism. Proc. IAHS 385, 1–4 (2024).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Nippgen, F., McGlynn, B. L., Marshall, A. & Emanuel, R. E. Landscape structure and climate influences on hydrologic response. Water Resour. Res. 47, W12528 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  74. Gnann, S. et al. The influence of topography on the global terrestrial water cycle. Rev. Geophys. 63, e2023RG000810 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  75. Ning, T. et al. Precipitation changes and its interaction with terrestrial water storage determine water yield variability in the world’s water towers. Sci. Total Environ. 880, 163285 (2023).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Levia, D. F. & Germer, S. A review of stemflow generation dynamics and stemflow-environment interactions in forests and shrublands. Rev. Geophys. 53, 673–714 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  77. Levia, D. F., Hudson, S. A., Llorens, P. & Nanko, K. Throughfall drop size distributions: a review and prospectus for future research. WIREs Water 4, e1225 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  78. Dunkerley, D. L. in Precipitation Partitioning by Vegetation: a Global Synthesis (eds Van Stan, J. T., Gutmann, E. & Friesen, J.) 182–213 (Springer, 2020).

  79. Zhang, Y., Viglione, A. & Blöschl, G. Temporal scaling of streamflow elasticity to precipitation: a global analysis. Water Resour. Res. 58, e2021WR030601 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  80. Benettin, P. et al. Transit time estimation in catchments: recent developments and future directions. Water Resour. Res. 58, e2022WR033096 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  81. Felton, A. J. et al. Global estimates of the storage and transit time of water through vegetation. Nat. Water 3, 59–69 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  82. Peel, M. C., Finlayson, B. L. & McMahon, T. A. Updated world map of the Köppen–Geiger climate classification. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 11, 1633–1644 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  83. Penna, D. Dataset for controls on runoff processes in forested catchments worldwide. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15123553 (2025).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was not supported by any project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agriculture, Food, Environment and Forestry, University of Florence, Florence, Italy

    Daniele Penna

  2. Forest Engineering Resources and Management Department, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA

    Daniele Penna

Authors
  1. Daniele Penna
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

This work was conceived and performed entirely by D.P.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniele Penna.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Water thanks Hilary McMillan and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Penna, D. Controls on runoff processes in forested catchments worldwide. Nat Water 4, 102–114 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44221-025-00547-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44221-025-00547-z

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing