Dewaide, Lorraine
Collon, Pauline
Poulain, Amaël
Rochez, Gaëtan
Hallet, Vincent
Article History
Received: 13 February 2017
Accepted: 12 September 2017
First Online: 26 September 2017
Change Date: 16 November 2019
Change Type: Correction
Change Date: 16 November 2019
Change Type: Correction
Change Details: There was an error in the fluorimeter data computing for tracer test 1 (Q= 20 l/s) at site 4. Indeed, due to a misinterpretation of the fluorimeter recording, some data should appear as interpolated. This interpolation was based, namely, on the comparison with other tracer test results. Figure 4 is corrected here with the interpolated data appearing as a red dotted line (top graph, see ���interpolated data���). In consequence, the recovery rate (39.9%) calculated in Table 1 is an estimation based on the interpolated data. A note has been added to Table 1.
Change Details: There was an error in the fluorimeter data computing for tracer test 1 (Q= 20 l/s) at site 4. Indeed, due to a misinterpretation of the fluorimeter recording, some data should appear as interpolated. This interpolation was based, namely, on the comparison with other tracer test results. Figure 4 is corrected here with the interpolated data appearing as a red dotted line (top graph, see ���interpolated data���). In consequence, the recovery rate (39.9%) calculated in Table 1 is an estimation based on the interpolated data. A note has been added to Table 1.