Next Article in Journal
Issues of Meander Development: Land Degradation or Ecological Value? The Example of the Sajó River, Hungary
Previous Article in Journal
Flood Routing Model with Particle Filter-Based Data Assimilation for Flash Flood Forecasting in the Micro-Model of Lower Yellow River, China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Establishment and Evaluation of the China Meteorological Assimilation Driving Datasets for the SWAT Model (CMADS)
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Water 2018, 10(11), 1611;

Applicability Assessment and Uncertainty Analysis of Multi-Precipitation Datasets for the Simulation of Hydrologic Models

Beijing Key Laboratory of Resource Environment and Geographic Information System, Capital Normal University, Beijing 100048, China
College of City and Tourism, Hengyang Normal University, Hengyang 421008, China
Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
Mathematical Sciences Institute, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
State Key Laboratory of Simulation and Regulation of Water Cycle in River Basin, China Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research, Beijing 100038, China
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 10 October 2018 / Revised: 3 November 2018 / Accepted: 5 November 2018 / Published: 9 November 2018
Full-Text   |   PDF [4811 KB, uploaded 13 November 2018]   |  


Hydrologic models are essential tools for understanding hydrologic processes, such as precipitation, which is a fundamental component of the water cycle. For an improved understanding and the evaluation of different precipitation datasets, especially their applicability for hydrologic modelling, three kinds of precipitation products, CMADS, TMPA-3B42V7 and gauge-interpolated datasets, are compared. Two hydrologic models (IHACRES and Sacramento) are applied to study the accuracy of the three types of precipitation products on the daily streamflow of the Lijiang River, which is located in southern China. The models are calibrated separately with different precipitation products, with the results showing that the CMADS product performs best based on the Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency, including a much better accuracy and better skill in capturing the streamflow peaks than the other precipitation products. The TMPA-3B42V7 product shows a small improvement on the gauge-interpolated product. Compared to TMPA-3B42V7, CMADS shows better agreement with the ground-observation data through a pixel-to-point comparison. The comparison of the two hydrologic models shows that both the IHACRES and Sacramento models perform well. The IHACRES model however displays less uncertainty and a higher applicability than the Sacramento model in the Lijiang River basin. View Full-Text
Keywords: precipitation; TMPA-3B42V7; CMADS; hydrologic model; uncertainty precipitation; TMPA-3B42V7; CMADS; hydrologic model; uncertainty

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material


Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Guo, B.; Zhang, J.; Xu, T.; Croke, B.; Jakeman, A.; Song, Y.; Yang, Q.; Lei, X.; Liao, W. Applicability Assessment and Uncertainty Analysis of Multi-Precipitation Datasets for the Simulation of Hydrologic Models. Water 2018, 10, 1611.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top