"Each WRS Placement scenario (entire watershed, upper watershed, lower watershed) has 45 simulations that vary WRS design depth, extent," "and hydraulic conductivity (WET_K). The simulation numbers are included in the .txt file names (""output_rch1"" for simulation #1). Note that the" "WRS extents in the ""WRS Area / WRS Placement Zone Area"" column are shown as fractions of the corresponding entire/upper/lower watershed" "in each subwatershed, depending on which WRS placement scenario is used. See the ""Mitchell_Le_Sueur_Subbasin_and_Contributing_Area_Data""" Excel file. "Flows were assessed at the lower gauges on each river. The lower gauges for the Le Sueur, Cobb, and Maple are represented by subbasins" "26, 66, and 54, respectively, in the SWAT output. Note that the SWAT model uses the finely resolved subbasin delineation with 175 subbasins" rather than the coarser 30 subbasins used for contributing area measurements. Simulation Number WRS depth (m) WRS Area / WRS Placement Zone Area WET_K (mm/hr) WETEVCOEF 1 0.5 0.005 0.036 1 2 0.5 0.005 0.36 1 3 0.5 0.005 3.6 1 4 0.5 0.01 0.036 1 5 0.5 0.01 0.36 1 6 0.5 0.01 3.6 1 7 0.5 0.02 0.036 1 8 0.5 0.02 0.36 1 9 0.5 0.02 3.6 1 10 0.5 0.04 0.036 1 11 0.5 0.04 0.36 1 12 0.5 0.04 3.6 1 13 0.5 0.075 0.036 1 14 0.5 0.075 0.36 1 15 0.5 0.075 3.6 1 16 1 0.005 0.036 1 17 1 0.005 0.36 1 18 1 0.005 3.6 1 19 1 0.01 0.036 1 20 1 0.01 0.36 1 21 1 0.01 3.6 1 22 1 0.02 0.036 1 23 1 0.02 0.36 1 24 1 0.02 3.6 1 25 1 0.04 0.036 1 26 1 0.04 0.36 1 27 1 0.04 3.6 1 28 1 0.075 0.036 1 29 1 0.075 0.36 1 30 1 0.075 3.6 1 31 2 0.005 0.036 1 32 2 0.005 0.36 1 33 2 0.005 3.6 1 34 2 0.01 0.036 1 35 2 0.01 0.36 1 36 2 0.01 3.6 1 37 2 0.02 0.036 1 38 2 0.02 0.36 1 39 2 0.02 3.6 1 40 2 0.04 0.036 1 41 2 0.04 0.36 1 42 2 0.04 3.6 1 43 2 0.075 0.036 1 44 2 0.075 0.36 1 45 2 0.075 3.6 1