Impact of watershed subdivision and soil data resolution on swat model calibration and parameter uncertainty

Journal of the American Water Resources Association

Volumn 45, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 1179-1196

  Kumar, Sanjiv ^a   Merwade, Venkatesh ^a  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Autocalibration; Hydrologic modeling; Parameter uncertainty; Soil Water Assessment Tool; Watershed subdivision

Indexed keywords

AUTOCALIBRATION; CALIBRATED MODEL; CALIBRATION PROCESS; CROSS VALIDATION; HYDROLOGIC MODELING; INDIANA; LOW FLOW; MANUAL CALIBRATION; MODEL CALIBRATION; MODEL CONFIGURATION; MODEL PARAMETERS; PARAMETER SET; PARAMETER UNCERTAINTY; RECALIBRATIONS; SOIL DATA; SOIL WATER ASSESSMENT TOOL; STREAMFLOW PREDICTION; STREAMFLOW RECORDS; STUDY AREAS; SWAT MODEL; WATERSHED MODELS;

CALIBRATION; GEOLOGIC MODELS; HYDRAULIC MODELS; LANDFORMS; SOIL MOISTURE; STREAM FLOW; UNDERWATER SOILS; WATERSHEDS;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

CALIBRATION; FLOW VELOCITY; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; MODEL VALIDATION; SOIL WATER; STREAMFLOW; WATERSHED;

INDIANA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 70350759680     PISSN: 1093474X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2009.00353.x     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Allen, R.G., 1986. A Penman for All Seasons. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering. ASCE 112 (4 348 368.
2. Allen, R.G., M.E. Jensen, J.L. Wright R.D. Burman, 1989. Operational Estimates of Evapotranspiration. Agronomy Journal 81 : 650 662.
3. Arabi, M., R.S. Govindaraju, M.M. Hantush Engel B, 2006. Role of Watershed Subdivision on Modeling the Effectiveness of Best Management Practices With SWAT. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 42 (2 513 528.
4. ArcSWAT 1.0.5, 2007. Soil and Water Assessment Tool: ArcSWAT. http://www.brc.tamus.edu/swat/arcswat.html, accessed July 15, 2007.
5. Arnold, J.G., R. Srinivasan, R.S. Muttiah J.R. Williams, 1998. Large Area Hydrologic Modeling and Assessment Part I: Model Development. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 34 (1 73 89. (Pubitemid 28190080)
6. Beven, K., 1993. Prophecy, Reality and Uncertainty in Distributed Hydrological Model. Advances in Water Resources 16 : 41 51.
7. Beven, K. A. Binley, 1992. The Future of Distributed Models: Model Calibration and Uncertainty Prediction. Hydrological Processes 6 (3 279 298.
8. Bingner, R.L., J. Garbrecht, J.G. Arnold R. Srinivasan, 1997. Effects of Watershed Subdivision on Simulation Runoff and Fine Sediment Yields. Transactions of the ASAE 40 (5 1329 1335.
9. Chaplot, V., 2005. Impact of DEM Mesh Size and Soil Map Scale on SWAT Runoff, Sediment, and NO3-N Loads Predictions. Journal of Hydrology 312 : 207 222.
10. Chaubey, I., A.S. Cotter, T.A. Costello T.S. Soerens, 2005. Effect of Data Resolution on SWAT Output Uncertainty. Hydrologic Process 19 : 621 628.
11. Cotter, A.S., I. Chaubey, T.A. Costello, T.S. Soerens M.A. Nelson, 2003. Water Quality Model Output Uncertainty as Affected by Spatial Resolution of Input Data. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 39 (4 977 986.
12. Di Luzio, M. J.G. Arnold, 2004. Formulation of a Hybrid Calibration Approach for a Physically Based Distributed Model With NEXRAD Data Input. Journal of Hydrology 298 : 136 154.
13. Di Luzio, M., J.G. Arnold R. Srinivasan, 2005. Effect of GIS Data Quality on Small Watershed Streamflow and Sediment Simulations. Hydrologic Process 19 : 629 650.
14. Duan, Q., S. Sorooshian V. Gupta, 1992. Effective and Efficient Global Optimization for Conceptual Rainfall-Runoff Models. Water Resources Research 28 (4 1015 1031.
15. Eckhardt, K., N. Fohrer H.-G. Frede, 2005. Automatic Model Calibration. Hydrologic Process 19 : 651 658.
16. Feyereisen, G.W., T.C. Strickland, D.D. Bosch D.J. Sullivan, 2007. Evaluation of SWAT Manual Calibration and Input Parameter Sensitivity in the Little River Watershed. Transactions of ASABE 50 (3 843 855.
17. FitzHugh, T.W. D.S. Mackay, 2000. Impacts of Input Parameter Spatial Aggregation on an Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution Model. Journal of Hydrology 236 : 35 53.
18. Franchini, M., G. Galeati S. Berra, 1998. Global Optimization Techniques for the Calibration of Conceptual Rainfall-Runoff Models. Hydrologic Sciences 43 (3 443 458.
19. Freer, J.E., K.J. Beven N.E. Peters 2003. Multivariate Seasonal Period Model Rejection Within the Generalised Likelihood Uncertainty Estimation Procedure. In : Calibration of Watershed Models, Q. Duan, H. Gupta, S. Sorooshian, A.N. Rousseau R. Turcotte (Editors AGU Books, Washington, D.C., pp. 69 87.
20. Gan, T.Y. G.F. Biftu, 1996. Automatic Calibration of Conceptual Rainfall-Runoff Models: Optimization Algorithms, Catchment Conditions, and Model Structure. Water Resources Research 32 (12 3513 3524.
21. Gassman, P.W., M.R. Reyes, C.H. Green J.G. Arnold, 2007. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool: Historical Development, Applications, and Future Research Directions. Transactions of the ASABE 50 (4 1211 1250.
22. Geza, M. J.E. McCray, 2008. Effects of Soil Data Resolution on SWAT Model Streamflow and Water Quality Predictions. Journal of Environmental Management 88 (3 393 406.
23. Govindaraju, R., B. Engel, D. Ebert, B. Fossum, M. Huber, C.T. Jafvert, S. Kumar, V. Merwade, D. Niyogi, L Oliver, S. Prabhakar, G. Rochon, C. Song L. Zhao, 2009. A Vision of Cyberinfrastructure for End-to-End Environmental Explorations (C4E4). Journal of Hydrologic Engineering 14 (1 53 64.
24. Green, C.H. A. van Griensven, 2008. Autocalibration in Hydrologic Modeling: Using SWAT2005 in Small-Scale Watershed. Environmental Modeling and Software 23 : 422 434.
25. Gupta, H.V., S. Sorooshian P.O. Yapo, 1998. Toward Improved Calibration of Hydrologic Models: Multiple and Noncommensurable Measure of Information. Water Resources Research 34 (4 751 763.
26. Jha, M., P.W. Gassman, S. Secchi, R. Gu J. Arnold, 2004. Effects of Watershed Subdivision on SWAT Flow, Sediments and Nutrient Predictions. Journal of American Water Resources Association 40 (3 811 825.
27. Kannan, N., C. Santhi J.G. Arnold, 2008. Development of an Automated Procedure for Estimation of the Spatial Variation of Runoff in Large River Basin. Journal of Hydrology 359 : 1 15.
28. Kannan, N., S.M. White, F. Worrall M.J. Whelan, 2007. Sensitivity Analysis and Identification of the Best Evapotraspiration and Runoff Options for Hydrological Modeling in SWAT-2000. Journal of Hydrology 332 : 456 466.
29. Krause, P., D.P. Boyle F. Base, 2005. Comparision of Different Efficiency Criteria for Hydrological Model Assessment. Advances in Geosciences 5 : 89 97.
30. Levick, L.R., D.J. Semmens, D.P. Guertin, I.S. Burns, S.N. Scott, C.L. Unkrich D.C. Goodrich, 2004. Adding Global Soils Data to the Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment Tool (AGWA). Second International Symposium on Transboundary Waters Management, Tucson, Arizona, November 16-19, 2004. CD Proceedings, 8 pp.
31. Lin, Z. D.E. Radcliffe, 2006. Automatic Calibration and Predictive Uncertainty Analysis of a Semidistributed Watershed Model. Vadose Zone Journal 5 : 248 260.
32. Madsen, H. 2000. Automatic Calibration of a Conceptual Rainfall-Runoff Model Using Multiple Objectives. Journal of Hydrology 235 (3-4 276 288.
33. Madsen, H., G. Eilson H.C. Ammentorp, 2002. Comparsion of Different Automated Strategies for Calibration of Rainfall-Runoff Models. Journal of Hydrology 261 : 48 59.
34. McKay, M.D., R.J. Beckman W.J. Conover, 1979. A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output From a Computer Code. Technometrics 21 (2 239 245.
35. Monteith, J.L., 1965. Evaporation and the Environment. In : The State and Movement of Water in Living Organisms, XIXth Symposium. Society for Experimental Biology, Cambridge University Press, Swansea, pp. 205 234.
36. Moriasi, D.N., J.G. Arnold, M.W. Van Liew, R.L. Bingner, R.D. Harmel T.L. Veith, 2007. Model Evaluation Guidelines for Systematic Quantification of Accuracy in Watershed Simulations. Transactions of the ASABE 50 (3 885 900.
37. Morris, M.D., 1991. Factorial Sampling Plans for Preliminary Computational Experiments. Technometrics 33 (2 161 174.
38. Muleta, M.K. J.W. Nicklow, 2005. Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis Coupled With Automatic Calibration for a Distributed Watershed Model. Journal of Hydrology 306 : 127 145.
39. Muleta, M.K., J.W. Nicklow E.G. Bekele, 2007. Sensitivity of a Distributed Watershed Simulation to Spatial Scale. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering 12 (2 163 172.
40. Neitsch, S.L., J.G. Arnold, J.R. Kiniry J.R. Williams, 2005. Soil and Water Assessment Tool Theoretical Documentation, Version 2005. Grassland, Soil and Water Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, Temple, Texas. http://www.brc.tamus.edu/swat/doc.html, accessed March 18, 2008.
41. NHD, 2008. National Hydrography Dataset. http://nhdgeo.usgs.gov/viewer. htm, accessed March 18, 2008.
42. Peschel, J.M., P.K. Hann R.E. Lacey, 2003. A SSURGO Pre-Processing Extension for the Arc View Soil and Water Assessment Tool. ASAE Paper No. 032123, St. Joseph, Michigan.
43. Peschel, J.M., P.K. Haan R.E. Lacey, 2006. Influences of Soil Dataset Resolution on Hydrologic Modeling. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 42 (5 1371 1389.
44. Santhi, C., N. Kannan, J.G. Arnold M. Di Luzio, 2008. Regional Scale Hydrologic Modeling: Spatial and Temporal Validation of Flows in Two River Basins. Journal of American Water Resources Association 44 (3 1 18.
45. Soil Conservation Service, 1972. Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Hydrology. In : National Engineering Handbook v. 4, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
46. Tripathi, M.P., N.S. Raghuwanshi G.P. Rao, 2006. Effect of Watershed Sub-Division on Simulation of Water Balance Components. Hydrologic Process 20 : 1137 1156.
47. USDA NRCS, SSURGO Soil Data, 2008. http://www.soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/ , accessed March 18, 2008.
48. USGS, NED 1 arc Second Digital Elevation Model, 2008. http://www.seamless.usgs.gov/, accessed March 18, 2008.
49. USGS, NLCD 2001 Land Cover Data, 2001. http://www.seamless.usgs.gov/, accessed March 18, 2008.
50. Vandenberghe, V., A. van Griensven W. Bauwens, 2001. Sensitivity Analysis and Calibration of the Parameters of ESWAT: Application to the River Dender. Water Science and Technology 43 (7 295 301.
51. van Griensven, A. W. Bauwens, 2003. Multiobjective Autocalibration for Semidistributed Water Quality Models. Water Resources Research 39 (12 1348, doi :.
52. Van Liew, M.W., J.G. Arnold D.D. Bosch, 2005. Problems and Potential of Autocalibrating a Hydrologic Model. Transactions of the ASAE 48 (3 1025 1040.
53. Van Liew, M.W., T.L. Veith, D.D. Bosch J.G. Arnold, 2007. Suitability of SWAT for the Conservation Effects Assessment Project: Comparison of USDA Agricultural Research Service Watersheds. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering 12 (2 173 189.
54. Vazquez-Amabile, G., B.A. Engel D.C. Flanagan, 2006. Modeling and Risk Analysis of Nonpoint-Source Pollution Caused by Atrazine Using SWAT. Transactions of the ASABE 49 (3 667 678.
55. Wang, X. A.M. Melesse, 2006. Effects of STATSGO and SSURGO as Inputs on SWAT Model's Snowmelt Simulation. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 42 (5 1217 1236.
56. White, K.L. I. Chaubey, 2005. Sensitivity Analysis, Calibration, and Validations for a Multisite and Multivariable SWAT Model. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 41 (5 1077 1089.
57. Williams, J.R., 1969. Flood Routing With Variable Travel Time or Variable Storage Coefficients. Transactions of the ASAE 12 (1 100 103.
58. Zhao, L., C.X. Song, V. Merwade, Y.M. Kim, R. Kalyanam, D. Ebert, B. Engel, R. Govindaraju, M. Huber, C.T. Jafvert, D. Niyogi S. Prabhakar, 2007. Interweaving Data and Computation for End-to-End Environmental Exploration on the TeraGrid. Proceedings of the TeraGrid 2007 Conference, Madison, Wisconsin, June 2007.