Dominant processes in a watershed are those that most strongly control hydrologic function and response. Estimating dominant processes enables hydrologists to design physically realistic streamflow generation models, design management interventions, and understand how climate and landscape features control hydrologic function. A recent approach to estimating dominant processes is through their link to hydrologic signatures, which are metrics that characterize the streamflow timeseries. Previous authors have used results from experimental watersheds to link signature values to underlying processes, but these links have not been tested on large scales. This paper fills that gap by testing signatures in large sample datasets from the U.S., Great Britain, Australia, and Brazil, and in Critical Zone Observatory (CZO) watersheds. We found that most inter-signature correlations are consistent with process interpretations, i.e., signatures that are supposed to represent the same process are correlated, and most signature values are consistent with process knowledge in CZO watersheds. Some exceptions occurred, such as infiltration and saturation excess processes that were often misidentified by signatures. Signature distributions vary by country, emphasizing the importance of regional context in understanding signature-process links and in classifying signature values as ‘high’ or ‘low’. Not all signatures were easily transferable from small- to large-scale studies, showing that visual or process-based assessment of signatures is important before large-scale use. We provide a summary table with information on the reliability of each signature for process identification. Overall, our results provide a reference for future studies that seek to use signatures to identify hydrological processes.

Soil moisture signatures provide a promising solution to overcome the difficulty of evaluating soil moisture dynamics in hydrologic models. Soil moisture signatures are metrics that quantify the dynamic aspects of soil moisture timeseries and enable process-based model evaluations. To date, soil moisture signatures have been tested only under limited land-use types. In this study, we explore soil moisture signatures’ ability to discriminate different dynamics among contrasting land-uses. We applied a set of nine soil moisture signatures to datasets from six in-situ soil moisture networks worldwide. The dataset covered a range of land-use types, including forested and deforested areas, shallow groundwater areas, wetlands, urban areas, grazed areas, and cropland areas. Our set of signatures characterized soil moisture dynamics at three temporal scales: event, season, and a complete timeseries. Statistical assessment of extracted signatures showed that (1) event-based signatures can distinguish different dynamics for all the land-uses, (2) season-based signatures can distinguish different dynamics for some types of land-uses (deforested vs. forested, urban vs. greenspace, and cropped vs. grazed vs. grassland contrasts), (3) timeseries-based signatures can distinguish different dynamics for some types of land-uses (deforested vs. forested, urban vs. greenspace, shallow vs. deep groundwater, wetland vs. non-wetland, and cropped vs. grazed vs. grassland contrasts). Further, we compared signature-based process interpretations against literature knowledge; event-based and timeseries-based signatures generally matched well with previous process understandings from literature, but season-based signatures did not. This study will be a useful guideline for understanding how catchment-scale soil moisture dynamics in various land-uses can be described using a standardized set of hydrologically relevant metrics.