An atlas of megadroughts in Europe and in the Mediterranean Basin during the Common Era provides insights into climate variability.

This contribution addresses two developing areas of sediment fingerprinting research. Specifically, how to improve the temporal resolution of source apportionment estimates whilst minimizing analytical costs and, secondly, how to consistently quantify all perceived uncertainties associated with the sediment mixing model procedure. This first matter is tackled by using direct X‐ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRFS) and diffuse reflectance infrared Fourier transform spectroscopy (DRIFTS) analyses of suspended particulate matter (SPM) covered filter papers in conjunction with automatic water samplers. This method enables SPM geochemistry to be quickly, accurately, inexpensively and non‐destructively monitored at high‐temporal resolution throughout the progression of numerous precipitation events. We then employed a Bayesian mixing model procedure to provide full characterization of spatial geochemical variability, instrument precision and residual error to yield a realistic and coherent assessment of the uncertainties associated with source apportionment estimates. Applying these methods to SPM data from the River Wensum catchment, UK, we have been able to apportion, with uncertainty, sediment contributions from eroding arable topsoils, damaged road verges and combined subsurface channel bank and agricultural field drain sources at 60‐ and 120‐minute resolution for the duration of five precipitation events. The results presented here demonstrate how combining Bayesian mixing models with the direct spectroscopic analysis of SPM‐covered filter papers can produce high‐temporal resolution source apportionment estimates that can assist with the appropriate targeting of sediment pollution mitigation measures at a catchment level. © 2015 The Authors. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Mixing models have become increasingly common tools for apportioning fluvial sediment load to various sediment sources across catchments using a wide variety of Bayesian and frequentist modeling approaches. In this study, we demonstrate how different model setups can impact upon resulting source apportionment estimates in a Bayesian framework via a one‐factor‐at‐a‐time (OFAT) sensitivity analysis. We formulate 13 versions of a mixing model, each with different error assumptions and model structural choices, and apply them to sediment geochemistry data from the River Blackwater, Norfolk, UK, to apportion suspended particulate matter (SPM) contributions from three sources (arable topsoils, road verges, and subsurface material) under base flow conditions between August 2012 and August 2013. Whilst all 13 models estimate subsurface sources to be the largest contributor of SPM (median ∼76%), comparison of apportionment estimates reveal varying degrees of sensitivity to changing priors, inclusion of covariance terms, incorporation of time‐variant distributions, and methods of proportion characterization. We also demonstrate differences in apportionment results between a full and an empirical Bayesian setup, and between a Bayesian and a frequentist optimization approach. This OFAT sensitivity analysis reveals that mixing model structural choices and error assumptions can significantly impact upon sediment source apportionment results, with estimated median contributions in this study varying by up to 21% between model versions. Users of mixing models are therefore strongly advised to carefully consider and justify their choice of model structure prior to conducting sediment source apportionment investigations.