Global-scale evaluation of precipitation datasets for hydrological modelling

S. Gebrechorkos, J. Leyland, S. Dadson, Sagy Cohen, Louise Slater, Michel Wortmann, Philip J. Ashworth, Georgina L. Bennett, R. Boothroyd, Hannah Cloke, Pauline Delorme, Helen Griffith, Richard Hardy, Laurence Hawker, Stuart McLelland, J. Neal, Andrew Nicholas, A. Tatem, Ellie Vahidi, Yinxue Liu, Justin Sheffield, Daniel R. Parsons, S. Darby
{"title":"Global-scale evaluation of precipitation datasets for hydrological modelling","authors":"S. Gebrechorkos, J. Leyland, S. Dadson, Sagy Cohen, Louise Slater, Michel Wortmann, Philip J. Ashworth, Georgina L. Bennett, R. Boothroyd, Hannah Cloke, Pauline Delorme, Helen Griffith, Richard Hardy, Laurence Hawker, Stuart McLelland, J. Neal, Andrew Nicholas, A. Tatem, Ellie Vahidi, Yinxue Liu, Justin Sheffield, Daniel R. Parsons, S. Darby","doi":"10.5194/hess-28-3099-2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Precipitation is the most important driver of the hydrological cycle, but it is challenging to estimate it over large scales from satellites and models. Here, we assessed the performance of six global and quasi-global high-resolution precipitation datasets (European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Reanalysis version 5 (ERA5), Climate Hazards group Infrared Precipitation with Stations version 2.0 (CHIRPS), Multi-Source Weighted-Ensemble Precipitation version 2.80 (MSWEP), TerraClimate (TERRA), Climate Prediction Centre Unified version 1.0 (CPCU), and Precipitation Estimation from Remotely Sensed Information using Artificial Neural Networks-Cloud Classification System-Climate Data Record (PERSIANN-CCS-CDR, hereafter PERCCDR) for hydrological modelling globally and quasi-globally. We forced the WBMsed global hydrological model with the precipitation datasets to simulate river discharge from 1983 to 2019 and evaluated the predicted discharge against 1825 hydrological stations worldwide, using a range of statistical methods. The results show large differences in the accuracy of discharge predictions when using different precipitation input datasets. Based on evaluation at annual, monthly, and daily timescales, MSWEP followed by ERA5 demonstrated a higher correlation (CC) and Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) than other datasets for more than 50 % of the stations, whilst ERA5 was the second-highest-performing dataset, and it showed the highest error and bias for about 20 % of the stations. PERCCDR is the least-well-performing dataset, with a bias of up to 99 % and a normalised root mean square error of up to 247 %. PERCCDR only show a higher KGE and CC than the other products for less than 10 % of the stations. Even though MSWEP provided the highest performance overall, our analysis reveals high spatial variability, meaning that it is important to consider other datasets in areas where MSWEP showed a lower performance. The results of this study provide guidance on the selection of precipitation datasets for modelling river discharge for a basin, region, or climatic zone as there is no single best precipitation dataset globally. Finally, the large discrepancy in the performance of the datasets in different parts of the world highlights the need to improve global precipitation data products.\n","PeriodicalId":507846,"journal":{"name":"Hydrology and Earth System Sciences","volume":" 17","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hydrology and Earth System Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-3099-2024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract. Precipitation is the most important driver of the hydrological cycle, but it is challenging to estimate it over large scales from satellites and models. Here, we assessed the performance of six global and quasi-global high-resolution precipitation datasets (European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Reanalysis version 5 (ERA5), Climate Hazards group Infrared Precipitation with Stations version 2.0 (CHIRPS), Multi-Source Weighted-Ensemble Precipitation version 2.80 (MSWEP), TerraClimate (TERRA), Climate Prediction Centre Unified version 1.0 (CPCU), and Precipitation Estimation from Remotely Sensed Information using Artificial Neural Networks-Cloud Classification System-Climate Data Record (PERSIANN-CCS-CDR, hereafter PERCCDR) for hydrological modelling globally and quasi-globally. We forced the WBMsed global hydrological model with the precipitation datasets to simulate river discharge from 1983 to 2019 and evaluated the predicted discharge against 1825 hydrological stations worldwide, using a range of statistical methods. The results show large differences in the accuracy of discharge predictions when using different precipitation input datasets. Based on evaluation at annual, monthly, and daily timescales, MSWEP followed by ERA5 demonstrated a higher correlation (CC) and Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) than other datasets for more than 50 % of the stations, whilst ERA5 was the second-highest-performing dataset, and it showed the highest error and bias for about 20 % of the stations. PERCCDR is the least-well-performing dataset, with a bias of up to 99 % and a normalised root mean square error of up to 247 %. PERCCDR only show a higher KGE and CC than the other products for less than 10 % of the stations. Even though MSWEP provided the highest performance overall, our analysis reveals high spatial variability, meaning that it is important to consider other datasets in areas where MSWEP showed a lower performance. The results of this study provide guidance on the selection of precipitation datasets for modelling river discharge for a basin, region, or climatic zone as there is no single best precipitation dataset globally. Finally, the large discrepancy in the performance of the datasets in different parts of the world highlights the need to improve global precipitation data products.
用于水文建模的降水数据集的全球范围评估
摘要降水量是水文循环最重要的驱动因素,但从卫星和模型中估算大尺度降水量具有挑战性。在此,我们评估了六种全球和准全球高分辨率降水数据集(欧洲中期天气预报中心(ECMWF)再分析第 5 版(ERA5)、气候灾害组红外降水与站点第 2.0 版(CHIRPS)、多源加权集合降水第 2.80 版(MSWEP)、TerraClimate(TerraClimate)、CHIRPS(CHIRPS)、Multi-Source Weighted-Ensemble Precipitation version 2.80 (MSWEP), TerraClimate (TERRA), Climate Prediction Centre Unified version 1.0 (CPCU), and Precipitation Estimation from Remotely Sensed Information using Artificial Neural Networks-Cloud Classification System-Climate Data Record (PERSIANN-CCS-CDR, 以下简称 PERCCDR) for hydrological modelling globally and quasi-globally.我们利用降水数据集强制 WBMsed 全球水文模型模拟了 1983 年至 2019 年的河流排水量,并使用一系列统计方法根据全球 1825 个水文站评估了预测排水量。结果表明,使用不同的降水输入数据集时,排水量预测的准确性存在很大差异。根据年、月和日时间尺度的评估,在 50% 以上的站点中,MSWEP 和 ERA5 的相关性(CC)和克林-古普塔效率(KGE)高于其他数据集,而 ERA5 是性能第二高的数据集,在约 20% 的站点中,ERA5 的误差和偏差最大。PERCCDR 是表现最差的数据集,偏差高达 99%,归一化均方根误差高达 247%。PERCCDR 仅在不到 10% 的站点显示出比其他产品更高的 KGE 和 CC 值。尽管 MSWEP 的总体性能最高,但我们的分析表明其空间变异性很大,这意味着在 MSWEP 性能较低的地区考虑其他数据集非常重要。本研究的结果为流域、区域或气候带河流排水建模降水数据集的选择提供了指导,因为在全球范围内并不存在单一的最佳降水数据集。最后,世界不同地区数据集的性能差异很大,这凸显了改进全球降水数据产品的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信