4.3.3 Case 4: ksn–Eavg and ksn-q–Eavg
Evolution ofksn ­Eavgand ksn-qEavgrelationships 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-qEavg 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-qEavg 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.