Next Article in Journal
Issues of Meander Development: Land Degradation or Ecological Value? The Example of the Sajó River, Hungary
Next Article in Special Issue
CMADS-Driven Simulation and Analysis of Reservoir Impacts on the Streamflow with a Simple Statistical Approach
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)
Open AccessArticle

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

1
Beijing Key Laboratory of Resource Environment and Geographic Information System, Capital Normal University, Beijing 100048, China
2
College of City and Tourism, Hengyang Normal University, Hengyang 421008, China
3
Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
4
Mathematical Sciences Institute, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
5
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.
Water 2018, 10(11), 1611; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10111611
Received: 10 October 2018 / Revised: 3 November 2018 / Accepted: 5 November 2018 / Published: 9 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
Show Figures

Figure 1

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.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop