马尼托巴省南部草原格网降水产品差异的评价

IF 5 2区 地球科学 Q1 WATER RESOURCES
Omid Mohammadiigder , Chandra Rupa Rajulapati , Ricardo Mantilla , Fisaha Unduche
{"title":"马尼托巴省南部草原格网降水产品差异的评价","authors":"Omid Mohammadiigder ,&nbsp;Chandra Rupa Rajulapati ,&nbsp;Ricardo Mantilla ,&nbsp;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 ,&nbsp;Chandra Rupa Rajulapati ,&nbsp;Ricardo Mantilla ,&nbsp;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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

网格化降水产品为草原地区的稀疏降水观测提供了另一种选择;然而,产品的准确性显著影响水流预测的准确性。本研究评估了7个每日网格降水数据集(2018-2023)与测量值之间的差异。本研究中选择的误差度量是由影响水文建模的最具影响力的误差来源提供的:系统偏差、非平稳时间变化和事件相关差异。季节性分析揭示了不同降水产品的不同表现模式。冬季降水估计表现出最大的相对偏差(RBias), ERA5_L(199 %)、GPM(161 %)和CaPA(137 %)大大高估了降水,尽管RMSE值最低(约1 mm/天),反映了观测到的降水量普遍较低。相反,夏季降水估计MRMS(11.2 %)和ERA5_L(9.15 %)的RBias较低,但它们显示出最大的均方根误差(RMSE)值(GSMAP高达9.78 mm/天),表明由强对流风暴驱动的绝对误差很大。秋季和春季估计呈现适度的RBias和RMSE值,大多数产品的表现更加一致。整体。MRMS和CaPA是表现最好的降水产品,其RMSE最低,各季节相关性最高。NLDAS-2、ERA5-L和persann具有中等精度,而GPM和GSMAP具有较高的误差和较低的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Evaluation of differences between gridded precipitation products in the Southern Prairies of Manitoba

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.
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
Journal of Hydrology-Regional Studies
Journal of Hydrology-Regional Studies Earth and Planetary Sciences-Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
8.50%
发文量
284
审稿时长
60 days
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.
×
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