揭示20世纪中期以来ECMWF第五代再分析在西非的时空降水模式

Q2 Environmental Science
René Bodjrènou , Luc Ollivier Sintondji , Françoise Comandan
{"title":"揭示20世纪中期以来ECMWF第五代再分析在西非的时空降水模式","authors":"René Bodjrènou ,&nbsp;Luc Ollivier Sintondji ,&nbsp;Françoise Comandan","doi":"10.1016/j.envadv.2025.100636","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Reanalysis datasets are a viable alternative to ensure the continuity of hydrological studies and to assess climate variability in regions where the availability and/or quality of observational data is limited. This study revealed the performance of the fifth generation of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) reanalyses, namely ERA5 (0.25°x0.25°) and ERA5-Land (0.1°x0.1°), over West Africa. They were analyzed on spatial and temporal scales (annual, monthly, daily, and hourly). The reanalysis time series were obtained by Selecting the Nearest Pixel (SNP) closest to the point station or by the Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW) method and compared with the observational data using Pearson correlation (c) and Relative Mean Absolute Error (RMAE). The results showed on average similar performance between ERA5 and ERA5-Land reanalyses, and also between SNP and IDW methods. However, a significant difference can be observed at some stations/areas due to the influence of topography and wind. Both reanalyses performed well on a spatial scale, with a clear distinction between the wet and dry areas. They also performed well on an annual (<em>c</em> = 0.60 and RMAE=22 %) and monthly (<em>c</em> = 0.80 and RMAE=40 %) scales. For 713 point stations, ERA5 and ERA5-Land showed negative trends in interannual variability for 82 % and 94 %, respectively. They agreed with the trends derived from observations (negative trends for 96 % of stations). However, the reanalyses performed poorly on both daily (<em>c</em> = 0.21 and RMAE=128 %) and hourly (<em>c</em> = 0.06 and RMAE=170 %) scales. Maximum daily precipitation (RX1day) is also less well represented, sometimes with negative correlations. The ECMWF fifth generation reanalyses need to be adjusted to improve their performance in describing precipitation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34473,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Advances","volume":"20 ","pages":"Article 100636"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revealing the spatiotemporal precipitation patterns of ECMWF fifth-generation reanalyses since the mid-20th century in West-Africa\",\"authors\":\"René Bodjrènou ,&nbsp;Luc Ollivier Sintondji ,&nbsp;Françoise Comandan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.envadv.2025.100636\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Reanalysis datasets are a viable alternative to ensure the continuity of hydrological studies and to assess climate variability in regions where the availability and/or quality of observational data is limited. This study revealed the performance of the fifth generation of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) reanalyses, namely ERA5 (0.25°x0.25°) and ERA5-Land (0.1°x0.1°), over West Africa. They were analyzed on spatial and temporal scales (annual, monthly, daily, and hourly). The reanalysis time series were obtained by Selecting the Nearest Pixel (SNP) closest to the point station or by the Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW) method and compared with the observational data using Pearson correlation (c) and Relative Mean Absolute Error (RMAE). The results showed on average similar performance between ERA5 and ERA5-Land reanalyses, and also between SNP and IDW methods. However, a significant difference can be observed at some stations/areas due to the influence of topography and wind. Both reanalyses performed well on a spatial scale, with a clear distinction between the wet and dry areas. They also performed well on an annual (<em>c</em> = 0.60 and RMAE=22 %) and monthly (<em>c</em> = 0.80 and RMAE=40 %) scales. For 713 point stations, ERA5 and ERA5-Land showed negative trends in interannual variability for 82 % and 94 %, respectively. They agreed with the trends derived from observations (negative trends for 96 % of stations). However, the reanalyses performed poorly on both daily (<em>c</em> = 0.21 and RMAE=128 %) and hourly (<em>c</em> = 0.06 and RMAE=170 %) scales. Maximum daily precipitation (RX1day) is also less well represented, sometimes with negative correlations. The ECMWF fifth generation reanalyses need to be adjusted to improve their performance in describing precipitation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34473,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Advances\",\"volume\":\"20 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100636\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Advances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666765725000286\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Environmental Science\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666765725000286","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

再分析数据集是确保水文研究连续性和在观测数据可用性和/或质量有限的地区评估气候变率的可行替代方法。本研究揭示了欧洲中期天气预报中心(ECMWF)第五代再分析,即ERA5(0.25°x0.25°)和ERA5- land(0.1°x0.1°)在西非的表现。在时空尺度(年、月、日、时)上进行分析。再分析时间序列采用最接近点站的SNP (selection The Nearest Pixel, SNP)或IDW (Inverse Distance Weighted, IDW)法获得,并与观测资料进行Pearson相关(c)和相对平均绝对误差(Relative Mean Absolute Error, RMAE)比较。结果表明,ERA5和ERA5- land再分析以及SNP和IDW方法之间的平均性能相似。然而,由于地形和风的影响,在一些站点/地区可以观察到明显的差异。这两种重新分析在空间尺度上都表现得很好,在潮湿和干燥地区之间有明显的区别。他们在年度(c = 0.60, RMAE= 22%)和月度(c = 0.80, RMAE= 40%)量表上也表现良好。在713个点站中,ERA5和ERA5- land的年际变率分别为82%和94%。他们同意观测得出的趋势(96%的气象站呈负趋势)。然而,再分析在每日(c = 0.21, RMAE= 128%)和小时(c = 0.06, RMAE= 170%)量表上表现不佳。最大日降水量(RX1day)的表现也不太好,有时呈负相关。ECMWF第五代再分析需要进行调整,以提高其描述降水的性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Revealing the spatiotemporal precipitation patterns of ECMWF fifth-generation reanalyses since the mid-20th century in West-Africa

Revealing the spatiotemporal precipitation patterns of ECMWF fifth-generation reanalyses since the mid-20th century in West-Africa
Reanalysis datasets are a viable alternative to ensure the continuity of hydrological studies and to assess climate variability in regions where the availability and/or quality of observational data is limited. This study revealed the performance of the fifth generation of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) reanalyses, namely ERA5 (0.25°x0.25°) and ERA5-Land (0.1°x0.1°), over West Africa. They were analyzed on spatial and temporal scales (annual, monthly, daily, and hourly). The reanalysis time series were obtained by Selecting the Nearest Pixel (SNP) closest to the point station or by the Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW) method and compared with the observational data using Pearson correlation (c) and Relative Mean Absolute Error (RMAE). The results showed on average similar performance between ERA5 and ERA5-Land reanalyses, and also between SNP and IDW methods. However, a significant difference can be observed at some stations/areas due to the influence of topography and wind. Both reanalyses performed well on a spatial scale, with a clear distinction between the wet and dry areas. They also performed well on an annual (c = 0.60 and RMAE=22 %) and monthly (c = 0.80 and RMAE=40 %) scales. For 713 point stations, ERA5 and ERA5-Land showed negative trends in interannual variability for 82 % and 94 %, respectively. They agreed with the trends derived from observations (negative trends for 96 % of stations). However, the reanalyses performed poorly on both daily (c = 0.21 and RMAE=128 %) and hourly (c = 0.06 and RMAE=170 %) scales. Maximum daily precipitation (RX1day) is also less well represented, sometimes with negative correlations. The ECMWF fifth generation reanalyses need to be adjusted to improve their performance in describing precipitation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Advances
Environmental Advances Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
165
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍:
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信