{"title":"马尼托巴省南部草原格网降水产品差异的评价","authors":"Omid Mohammadiigder , Chandra Rupa Rajulapati , Ricardo Mantilla , Fisaha Unduche","doi":"10.1016/j.ejrh.2025.102786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Study Region</h3><div>Southern Manitoba, Canada</div></div><div><h3>Study Focus</h3><div>Gridded precipitation products offer an alternative to sparse rainfall observations in the Prairies; however, the accuracy of the products significantly influences the accuracy of streamflow predictions. This study evaluates discrepancies among seven daily gridded precipitation datasets (2018–2023) against gauge observations.</div></div><div><h3>New Hydrological Insights for the Region</h3><div>The error metrics chosen in this study are informed by the most impactful sources of error that affect hydrological modelling: systematic biases, non-stationary temporal variations, and event-related discrepancies. Seasonal analysis reveals distinct performance patterns across precipitation products. Winter estimates of precipitation exhibit the highest relative bias (RBias), with ERA5_L (199 %), GPM (161 %), and CaPA (137 %) substantially overestimating precipitation, despite having the lowest RMSE values (around 1 mm/day), reflecting the generally low observed precipitation amounts. Conversely, summer estimates of precipitation show lower RBias for MRMS (11.2 %) and ERA5_L (9.15 %), however, they exhibit the largest root mean square error (RMSE) values (up to 9.78 mm/day for GSMAP), indicating large absolute errors driven by intense convective storms. Fall and spring estimates present moderate RBias and RMSE values, with most products performing more consistently. Overall. MRMS and CaPA are the top-performing precipitation products, showing the lowest RMSE and highest correlation across seasons. NLDAS-2, ERA5-L, and PERSIANN have moderate accuracy, while GPM and GSMAP show higher errors and lower correlations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48620,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hydrology-Regional Studies","volume":"62 ","pages":"Article 102786"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of differences between gridded precipitation products in the Southern Prairies of Manitoba\",\"authors\":\"Omid Mohammadiigder , Chandra Rupa Rajulapati , Ricardo Mantilla , Fisaha Unduche\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejrh.2025.102786\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Study Region</h3><div>Southern Manitoba, Canada</div></div><div><h3>Study Focus</h3><div>Gridded precipitation products offer an alternative to sparse rainfall observations in the Prairies; however, the accuracy of the products significantly influences the accuracy of streamflow predictions. This study evaluates discrepancies among seven daily gridded precipitation datasets (2018–2023) against gauge observations.</div></div><div><h3>New Hydrological Insights for the Region</h3><div>The error metrics chosen in this study are informed by the most impactful sources of error that affect hydrological modelling: systematic biases, non-stationary temporal variations, and event-related discrepancies. Seasonal analysis reveals distinct performance patterns across precipitation products. Winter estimates of precipitation exhibit the highest relative bias (RBias), with ERA5_L (199 %), GPM (161 %), and CaPA (137 %) substantially overestimating precipitation, despite having the lowest RMSE values (around 1 mm/day), reflecting the generally low observed precipitation amounts. Conversely, summer estimates of precipitation show lower RBias for MRMS (11.2 %) and ERA5_L (9.15 %), however, they exhibit the largest root mean square error (RMSE) values (up to 9.78 mm/day for GSMAP), indicating large absolute errors driven by intense convective storms. Fall and spring estimates present moderate RBias and RMSE values, with most products performing more consistently. Overall. MRMS and CaPA are the top-performing precipitation products, showing the lowest RMSE and highest correlation across seasons. NLDAS-2, ERA5-L, and PERSIANN have moderate accuracy, while GPM and GSMAP show higher errors and lower correlations.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48620,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hydrology-Regional Studies\",\"volume\":\"62 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102786\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hydrology-Regional Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214581825006159\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"WATER RESOURCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hydrology-Regional Studies","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214581825006159","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"WATER RESOURCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluation of differences between gridded precipitation products in the Southern Prairies of Manitoba
Study Region
Southern Manitoba, Canada
Study Focus
Gridded precipitation products offer an alternative to sparse rainfall observations in the Prairies; however, the accuracy of the products significantly influences the accuracy of streamflow predictions. This study evaluates discrepancies among seven daily gridded precipitation datasets (2018–2023) against gauge observations.
New Hydrological Insights for the Region
The error metrics chosen in this study are informed by the most impactful sources of error that affect hydrological modelling: systematic biases, non-stationary temporal variations, and event-related discrepancies. Seasonal analysis reveals distinct performance patterns across precipitation products. Winter estimates of precipitation exhibit the highest relative bias (RBias), with ERA5_L (199 %), GPM (161 %), and CaPA (137 %) substantially overestimating precipitation, despite having the lowest RMSE values (around 1 mm/day), reflecting the generally low observed precipitation amounts. Conversely, summer estimates of precipitation show lower RBias for MRMS (11.2 %) and ERA5_L (9.15 %), however, they exhibit the largest root mean square error (RMSE) values (up to 9.78 mm/day for GSMAP), indicating large absolute errors driven by intense convective storms. Fall and spring estimates present moderate RBias and RMSE values, with most products performing more consistently. Overall. MRMS and CaPA are the top-performing precipitation products, showing the lowest RMSE and highest correlation across seasons. NLDAS-2, ERA5-L, and PERSIANN have moderate accuracy, while GPM and GSMAP show higher errors and lower correlations.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies publishes original research papers enhancing the science of hydrology and aiming at region-specific problems, past and future conditions, analysis, review and solutions. The journal particularly welcomes research papers that deliver new insights into region-specific hydrological processes and responses to changing conditions, as well as contributions that incorporate interdisciplinarity and translational science.