Large Uncertainties in Runoff Estimations of GLDAS Versions 2.0 and 2.1 in China
Abstract Gauge observed runoff can reflect influences of both natural hydrological cycle and human intervention. The Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) 2.0 and 2.1 provide abundant runoff which are useful for water resources assessment in ungauged/poorly gauged regions. However, GLDAS2.0 a...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
American Geophysical Union (AGU)
2020-01-01
|
Series: | Earth and Space Science |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EA000829 |
id |
doaj-4c6682774be0401c978ca48bab7df75f |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-4c6682774be0401c978ca48bab7df75f2020-11-24T21:03:46ZengAmerican Geophysical Union (AGU)Earth and Space Science2333-50842020-01-0171n/an/a10.1029/2019EA000829Large Uncertainties in Runoff Estimations of GLDAS Versions 2.0 and 2.1 in ChinaWei Qi0Junguo Liu1Hong Yang2Xueping Zhu3Yong Tian4Xin Jiang5Xu Huang6Lian Feng7School of Environmental Science and Engineering Southern University of Science and Technology Shenzhen ChinaSchool of Environmental Science and Engineering Southern University of Science and Technology Shenzhen ChinaEawag Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology Duebendorf SwitzerlandCollege of Water Resources Science and Engineering Taiyuan University of Technology Taiyuan ChinaSchool of Environmental Science and Engineering Southern University of Science and Technology Shenzhen ChinaWater Resources Research Institute of Shandong Province Jinan ChinaBureau of Hydrology (Information Center) Songliao Water Resources Commission Jilin ChinaSchool of Environmental Science and Engineering Southern University of Science and Technology Shenzhen ChinaAbstract Gauge observed runoff can reflect influences of both natural hydrological cycle and human intervention. The Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) 2.0 and 2.1 provide abundant runoff which are useful for water resources assessment in ungauged/poorly gauged regions. However, GLDAS2.0 and GLDAS2.1 runoff have only been validated and inter‐compared in very limited regions. In this study, they are evaluated and inter‐compared utilizing gauge observation in 11 large river basins in China. Results show their runoff have large uncertainties: absolute values of relative bias (|RB|) being above 39% and Nash‐Sutcliffe efficiency lower than 0.15 on average, but GLDAS2.1 is better. Both of them have large uncertainty in the Tibetan Plateau:|RB|are higher than 40%. The gap between GLDAS runoff and observations could attribute to both GLDAS system uncertainty and the fact that GLDAS does not consider human intervention. Therefore, cautions should be taken when using them in coupled human‐natural systems.https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EA000829ChinaGLDASrunoffthe Tibetan Plateauuncertainty |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Wei Qi Junguo Liu Hong Yang Xueping Zhu Yong Tian Xin Jiang Xu Huang Lian Feng |
spellingShingle |
Wei Qi Junguo Liu Hong Yang Xueping Zhu Yong Tian Xin Jiang Xu Huang Lian Feng Large Uncertainties in Runoff Estimations of GLDAS Versions 2.0 and 2.1 in China Earth and Space Science China GLDAS runoff the Tibetan Plateau uncertainty |
author_facet |
Wei Qi Junguo Liu Hong Yang Xueping Zhu Yong Tian Xin Jiang Xu Huang Lian Feng |
author_sort |
Wei Qi |
title |
Large Uncertainties in Runoff Estimations of GLDAS Versions 2.0 and 2.1 in China |
title_short |
Large Uncertainties in Runoff Estimations of GLDAS Versions 2.0 and 2.1 in China |
title_full |
Large Uncertainties in Runoff Estimations of GLDAS Versions 2.0 and 2.1 in China |
title_fullStr |
Large Uncertainties in Runoff Estimations of GLDAS Versions 2.0 and 2.1 in China |
title_full_unstemmed |
Large Uncertainties in Runoff Estimations of GLDAS Versions 2.0 and 2.1 in China |
title_sort |
large uncertainties in runoff estimations of gldas versions 2.0 and 2.1 in china |
publisher |
American Geophysical Union (AGU) |
series |
Earth and Space Science |
issn |
2333-5084 |
publishDate |
2020-01-01 |
description |
Abstract Gauge observed runoff can reflect influences of both natural hydrological cycle and human intervention. The Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) 2.0 and 2.1 provide abundant runoff which are useful for water resources assessment in ungauged/poorly gauged regions. However, GLDAS2.0 and GLDAS2.1 runoff have only been validated and inter‐compared in very limited regions. In this study, they are evaluated and inter‐compared utilizing gauge observation in 11 large river basins in China. Results show their runoff have large uncertainties: absolute values of relative bias (|RB|) being above 39% and Nash‐Sutcliffe efficiency lower than 0.15 on average, but GLDAS2.1 is better. Both of them have large uncertainty in the Tibetan Plateau:|RB|are higher than 40%. The gap between GLDAS runoff and observations could attribute to both GLDAS system uncertainty and the fact that GLDAS does not consider human intervention. Therefore, cautions should be taken when using them in coupled human‐natural systems. |
topic |
China GLDAS runoff the Tibetan Plateau uncertainty |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EA000829 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT weiqi largeuncertaintiesinrunoffestimationsofgldasversions20and21inchina AT junguoliu largeuncertaintiesinrunoffestimationsofgldasversions20and21inchina AT hongyang largeuncertaintiesinrunoffestimationsofgldasversions20and21inchina AT xuepingzhu largeuncertaintiesinrunoffestimationsofgldasversions20and21inchina AT yongtian largeuncertaintiesinrunoffestimationsofgldasversions20and21inchina AT xinjiang largeuncertaintiesinrunoffestimationsofgldasversions20and21inchina AT xuhuang largeuncertaintiesinrunoffestimationsofgldasversions20and21inchina AT lianfeng largeuncertaintiesinrunoffestimationsofgldasversions20and21inchina |
_version_ |
1716773073922818048 |