Major advances continue to be made in development and application of the connectivity concept as a framework for analysis of runoff and sediment fluxes in catchments and landscapes and it is becoming a major paradigm in geomorphology and hydrology. It involves the identification of the locations and patterns of pathways of water and sediment movement and extent of their linkage. However, significant issues and challenges remain. Various approaches to identification and quantification of connectivity in a landscape are taken, involving mapping and modelling of various types. It is important in applying techniques that the purpose and basis is clear. A differentiation is made here between direct mapping of known situations, which elucidates patterns and can then be the basis for quantification, and that of modelling, which is predictive and often explanatory but requires validation. Thus, there is a synergy between the two. Various aspects of the spatial arrangements may be of interest, such as sources of sediment to a point in a catchment, pathway position, hotspots of erosion and deposition, controls on the connectivity, positions of disconnectors, influence of human activities, and natural variability with rainfall, seasons and other factors. The approach and styles of mapping usually entail recording all links at a particular time, possibly with differentiation of type of link, and commonly based on field surveys, but developments are taking place to test the effectiveness of drones for this purpose. Much modelling has used Connectivity Indices to generate patterns, with varying weighting of factors, and additional factors are now being introduced to indices to add functionality to the modelling. The other major approach to modelling is that of graph theory, based on network analysis, which is particularly applied to larger river systems. Both types of modelling have benefitted from availability of open-access software. Deficiencies and problems in use of modelling and indices persist, including: need for validation; ability to recognise disconnections; variability of connectivity over time; distinguishing sediment from flow connectivity; and clarity of representation. Challenges remain of spatial scale, particularly in validation/ field surveys but also base data for modelling; in identifying link status and functioning or dynamics at various timescales, and incorporation of feedback arising from those dynamics; in incorporating processes as a step to this functionality, and in testing indices. Methods and approaches to addressing these challenges are discussed and evaluated here.

连通性概念作为流域和景观径流和沉积物通量分析框架的发展和应用继续取得重大进展，它正在成为地貌学和水文学的主要范式。它涉及确定水和沉积物运动路径的位置和模式以及它们之间的联系程度。然而，重大问题和挑战依然存在。采用了各种方法来识别和量化景观中的连通性，包括各种类型的映射和建模。在应用技术时，目的和基础明确是很重要的。这里区分了已知情况的直接映射，它阐明了模式，然后可以作为量化的基础，与建模的映射，这是预测性的，通常是解释性的，但需要验证。因此，两者之间存在协同作用。空间安排的各个方面都可能令人感兴趣，例如流域中某一点的沉积物来源、路径位置、侵蚀和沉积的热点、对连通性的控制、隔离开关的位置、人类活动的影响以及自然变化雨量、季节等因素。绘图的方法和风格通常需要在特定时间记录所有链接，可能会根据链接类型进行区分，并且通常基于实地调查，但正在开发以测试无人机为此目的的有效性。许多建模使用连接指数来生成模式，具有不同的因素权重，现在正在向指数引入其他因素，以增加建模的功能。另一种主要的建模方法是基于网络分析的图论，特别适用于较大的河流系统。两种类型的建模都受益于开放访问软件的可用性。建模和指数使用中的缺陷和问题仍然存在，包括： 需要验证；识别断线的能力；连通性随时间的变化；从流动连通性中区分沉积物；和表述的清晰性。挑战仍然存在于空间尺度上，特别是在验证/实地调查以及建模的基础数据方面；识别不同时间尺度的链接状态和功能或动态，并结合这些动态产生的反馈；将流程作为此功能的一个步骤，以及测试指标。此处讨论和评估了应对这些挑战的方法和方法。