Cargando…

Comparison and Evaluation of Gridded Precipitation Datasets in a Kansas Agricultural Watershed Using SWAT

Gridded precipitation datasets are becoming a convenient substitute for gauge measurements in hydrological modeling; however, these data have not been fully evaluated across a range of conditions. We compared four gridded datasets (Daily Surface Weather and Climatological Summaries [DAYMET], North A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Muche, Muluken E., Sinnathamby, Sumathy, Parmar, Rajbir, Knightes, Christopher D., Johnston, John M., Wolfe, Kurt, Purucker, S. Thomas, Cyterski, Michael J., Smith, Deron
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7788048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33424224
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12819
_version_ 1783632952763088896
author Muche, Muluken E.
Sinnathamby, Sumathy
Parmar, Rajbir
Knightes, Christopher D.
Johnston, John M.
Wolfe, Kurt
Purucker, S. Thomas
Cyterski, Michael J.
Smith, Deron
author_facet Muche, Muluken E.
Sinnathamby, Sumathy
Parmar, Rajbir
Knightes, Christopher D.
Johnston, John M.
Wolfe, Kurt
Purucker, S. Thomas
Cyterski, Michael J.
Smith, Deron
author_sort Muche, Muluken E.
collection PubMed
description Gridded precipitation datasets are becoming a convenient substitute for gauge measurements in hydrological modeling; however, these data have not been fully evaluated across a range of conditions. We compared four gridded datasets (Daily Surface Weather and Climatological Summaries [DAYMET], North American Land Data Assimilation System [NLDAS], Global Land Data Assimilation System [GLDAS], and Parameter-elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model [PRISM]) as precipitation data sources and evaluated how they affected hydrologic model performance when compared with a gauged dataset, Global Historical Climatology Network-Daily (GHCN-D). Analyses were performed for the Delaware Watershed at Perry Lake in eastern Kansas. Precipitation indices for DAYMET and PRISM precipitation closely matched GHCN-D, whereas NLDAS and GLDAS showed weaker correlations. We also used these precipitation data as input to the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model that confirmed similar trends in streamflow simulation. For stations with complete data, GHCN-D based SWAT-simulated streamflow variability better than gridded precipitation data. During low flow periods we found PRISM performed better, whereas both DAYMET and NLDAS performed better in high flow years. Our results demonstrate that combining gridded precipitation sources with gauge-based measurements can improve hydrologic model performance, especially for extreme events.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7788048
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77880482021-05-16 Comparison and Evaluation of Gridded Precipitation Datasets in a Kansas Agricultural Watershed Using SWAT Muche, Muluken E. Sinnathamby, Sumathy Parmar, Rajbir Knightes, Christopher D. Johnston, John M. Wolfe, Kurt Purucker, S. Thomas Cyterski, Michael J. Smith, Deron J Am Water Resour Assoc Article Gridded precipitation datasets are becoming a convenient substitute for gauge measurements in hydrological modeling; however, these data have not been fully evaluated across a range of conditions. We compared four gridded datasets (Daily Surface Weather and Climatological Summaries [DAYMET], North American Land Data Assimilation System [NLDAS], Global Land Data Assimilation System [GLDAS], and Parameter-elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model [PRISM]) as precipitation data sources and evaluated how they affected hydrologic model performance when compared with a gauged dataset, Global Historical Climatology Network-Daily (GHCN-D). Analyses were performed for the Delaware Watershed at Perry Lake in eastern Kansas. Precipitation indices for DAYMET and PRISM precipitation closely matched GHCN-D, whereas NLDAS and GLDAS showed weaker correlations. We also used these precipitation data as input to the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model that confirmed similar trends in streamflow simulation. For stations with complete data, GHCN-D based SWAT-simulated streamflow variability better than gridded precipitation data. During low flow periods we found PRISM performed better, whereas both DAYMET and NLDAS performed better in high flow years. Our results demonstrate that combining gridded precipitation sources with gauge-based measurements can improve hydrologic model performance, especially for extreme events. 2020-05-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7788048/ /pubmed/33424224 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12819 Text en This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Article
Muche, Muluken E.
Sinnathamby, Sumathy
Parmar, Rajbir
Knightes, Christopher D.
Johnston, John M.
Wolfe, Kurt
Purucker, S. Thomas
Cyterski, Michael J.
Smith, Deron
Comparison and Evaluation of Gridded Precipitation Datasets in a Kansas Agricultural Watershed Using SWAT
title Comparison and Evaluation of Gridded Precipitation Datasets in a Kansas Agricultural Watershed Using SWAT
title_full Comparison and Evaluation of Gridded Precipitation Datasets in a Kansas Agricultural Watershed Using SWAT
title_fullStr Comparison and Evaluation of Gridded Precipitation Datasets in a Kansas Agricultural Watershed Using SWAT
title_full_unstemmed Comparison and Evaluation of Gridded Precipitation Datasets in a Kansas Agricultural Watershed Using SWAT
title_short Comparison and Evaluation of Gridded Precipitation Datasets in a Kansas Agricultural Watershed Using SWAT
title_sort comparison and evaluation of gridded precipitation datasets in a kansas agricultural watershed using swat
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7788048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33424224
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12819
work_keys_str_mv AT muchemulukene comparisonandevaluationofgriddedprecipitationdatasetsinakansasagriculturalwatershedusingswat
AT sinnathambysumathy comparisonandevaluationofgriddedprecipitationdatasetsinakansasagriculturalwatershedusingswat
AT parmarrajbir comparisonandevaluationofgriddedprecipitationdatasetsinakansasagriculturalwatershedusingswat
AT knighteschristopherd comparisonandevaluationofgriddedprecipitationdatasetsinakansasagriculturalwatershedusingswat
AT johnstonjohnm comparisonandevaluationofgriddedprecipitationdatasetsinakansasagriculturalwatershedusingswat
AT wolfekurt comparisonandevaluationofgriddedprecipitationdatasetsinakansasagriculturalwatershedusingswat
AT puruckersthomas comparisonandevaluationofgriddedprecipitationdatasetsinakansasagriculturalwatershedusingswat
AT cyterskimichaelj comparisonandevaluationofgriddedprecipitationdatasetsinakansasagriculturalwatershedusingswat
AT smithderon comparisonandevaluationofgriddedprecipitationdatasetsinakansasagriculturalwatershedusingswat