Structural uncertainty assessment in a discharge simulation model;Evaluation de l'incertitude structurelle d'un modèle de simulation de dèbit

Hydrological Sciences Journal

Volumn 56, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 854-869

  Zhang, Xiaoyong ^a   Hörmann, Georg ^a   Gao, Junfeng ^b   Fohrer, Nicola ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KIEL   (Germany)

^b NANJING INSTITUTE OF GEOGRAPHY AND LIMNOLOGY   (China)

Author keywords

hydrological modelling; Kielstau, Germany; model structural uncertainty; PCRaster; perceptual model; XitaoXi, China

Indexed keywords

HYDROLOGICAL MODELLING; KIELSTAU, GERMANY; PCRASTER; PERCEPTUAL MODEL; XITAOXI, CHINA;

CATCHMENTS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; STREAM FLOW; WATER SUPPLY;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

COMPLEXITY; DRAINAGE; EVAPOTRANSPIRATION; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; PEAK FLOW; PRECIPITATION (CLIMATOLOGY); RIVER DISCHARGE; RIVER FLOW; RUNOFF; STREAMFLOW; WETLAND;

GERMANY; KIELSTAU BASIN; SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN;

EID: 84863259980     PISSN: 02626667     EISSN: 21503435     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/02626667.2011.587426     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Abbaspour, K.C., Johnson, C.A. and van Genuchten, M.T. 2004. Estimating uncertain flow and transport parameters using a sequential uncertainty fitting procedure. Vadose Zone J, 3: 1340-1352.
2. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D. and Smith, M. Crop evapotranspiration-Guidelines for computing crop water requirements. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. 1998. ISBN 92-5-104219-5
3. Andersen, H.E. 2003. Hydrology, nutrient processes and vegetation in floodplain wetlands, Denmark: PhD Thesis. National Environmental Research Institute.
4. Beven, K. 2001. Rainfall-Runoff Modelling: The Primer, Chichester: Wiley.
5. Beven, K. and Binley, A. 1992. The future of distributed models-model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrol. Processes, 6(3): 279-298.
6. Beven, K. and Freer, J. 2001. Equifinality, data assimilation and uncertainty estimation in mechanistic modelling of complex environmental systems using the GLUE methodology. J. Hydrol, 249(1-4): 11-29.
7. Beven, K., Smith, P. and Freer, J. 2007. Comment on "Hydrological forecasting uncertainty assessment: Incoherence of the GLUE methodology" by P. Mantovan and E. Todini. J. Hydrol, 338: 315-318.
8. Brown, J.D. and Heuvelink, G.B. 2005. "Assessing uncertainty propagation through physically based models of soil water flow and solute transport". In Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences, Edited by: Anderson, M. 1181-1196. Chichester: Wiley.
9. Bullock, A. and Acreman, M. 2003. The role of wetlands in the hydrological cycle. Hydrol. Earth System Sci, 7(2): 358-389.
10. Butts, M.B., Payne, J.T., Kristensen, M. and Madsen, H. 2004. An evaluation of the impact of model structure on hydrological modelling uncertainty for streamflow simulation. J. Hydrol, 298: 242-266.
11. Carpenter, T.M. and Georgakakos, K.P. 2004. Impacts of parametric and radar rainfall uncertainty on the ensemble streamflow simulations of a distributed hydrologic model. J. Hydrol., 298: 202-221.
12. Choi, H.T. and Beven, K.J. 2007. Multi-period and multi-criteria model conditioning to reduce prediction uncertainty in an application of TOPMODEL within the GLUE framework. J. Hydrol, 332: 316-336.
13. Christiaens, K. and Feyen, J. 2002. Constraining soil hydraulic parameter and output uncertainty of the distributed hydrological MIKE SHE model using the GLUE framework. Hydrol. Processes, 16: 373-391.
14. Clausnitzer, V., Hopmans, J.W. and Starr, J.L. 1998. Parameter uncertainty analysis of common infiltration models. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J, 62: 1477-1487.
15. DVWK (Deutscher Verband für Wasserwirtschaft und Kulturbau e.V.). 1996. Ermittlung der Verdunstung von Land- und Wasserflächen. Bonn: DVWK, Merkblätter zur Wasserwirtschaft, Heft, 238(1996): 135
16. Ewen, J., O'Donnell, G., Burton, A. and O'Connell, E. 2006. Errors and uncertainty in physically-based rainfall-runoff modelling of catchment change effects. J. Hydrol, 330(3-4): 641-650.
17. Gao, J., Lu, G., Zhao, G. and Li, J. 2006. Watershed data model: a case study of Xitiaoxi sub-waterhed, Taihu Basin (in Chinese, with English abstract). J. Lake Sciences, 18(3): 312-33l.
18. Glugla, G. 1969. Berechnungsverfahren zur Ermittlung des aktuellen Wassergehalts und Gravitationswasserabflusses im Boden. Albrecht-Thaer-Archiv, 13(4): 371-376.
19. Gourley, J. and Vieux, B. 2006. A method for identifying sources of model uncertainty in rainfall-runoff simulations. J. Hydrol, 327: 68-80.
20. Gupta, H.V., Beven, K.J. and Wagener, T. 2005. "Model calibration and uncertainty estimation". In Encyclopedia of Hydrologic Sciences, Edited by: Anderson, M. Chichester: Wiley.
21. Gupta, H.V. and Sorooshian, S. 1998. Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: multiple and noncommensurable measures of information. Water Resour. Res, 34(4): 751-763.
22. Haan, C.T., Storm, D.E., Al-Issa, T., Prabhu, S., Sabbagh, G.J. and Edwards, D.R. 1998. Effect of parameter distributions on uncertainty analysis of hydrologic models. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Engrs, 41: 65-70.
23. Hansen, S., Thorsen, M., Pebesma, E.J., Kleeschulte, S. and Svendsen, H. 1999. Uncertainty in simulated nitrate leaching due to uncertainty in input data. A case study. Soil Use Manag, 15: 167-175.
24. Haude. 1958. Ueber die Verwendung verschiedener Klimafaktoren zur Berechnung der Evaporation und Evapotranspiration. Meteorol. Rundschau, 11: 96-99.
25. Hörmann, G., Zhang, X. and Fohrer, N. 2007. Comparison of a simple and a spatially distributed hydrologic model for the simulation of a lowland catchment in Northern Germany. Ecol. Modelling, 209(1): 21-28.
26. Jin, X. and Gao, J. 2006. Modelling of human activities impacts to hydrological processes-based on distributed hydrological model, Chinese: MSc Thesis, Nanjing Institute of Geography & Limnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences. with English abstract
27. Krause, P., Boyle, D.P. and Baese, F. 2005. Comparison of different efficiency criteria for hydrological model assessment. Adv. Geosci, 5: 89-97.
28. Lindenschmidt, K.E. 2006. The effect of complexity on parameter sensitivity and model uncertainty in river water quality modelling. Ecol. Modelling, 190: 72-86.
29. Lindenschmidt, K.E., Fleischbein, K. and Baborowski, M. 2007. Structural uncertainty in a river water quality modelling system. Ecol. Modelling, 204: 289-300.
30. Melching, C.S. 1995. "Reliability estimation". In Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, Edited by: Singh, V. 69-118. Littleton, CO: Water Resources Publications.
31. Nash, J.E. and Sutcliffe, J.V. 1970. River flow forecasting through conceptual models. Part I: A discussion on principles. J Hydrol, 10: 282-290.
32. Neuman, S.P. 2002. Accounting for conceptual model uncertainty via maximum likelihood Bayesian model averaging. Acta Univ. Carolinae Geologica, 46(2/3): 529-534.
33. Radwan, M., Willems, P. and Berlamont, J. 2004. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis for river quality modelling. J. Hydroinform, 6: 83-99.
34. Ratto, M., Young, P.C., Romanowicz, R., Pappenberger, F., Saltelli, A. and Pagano, A. 2007. Uncertainty, sensitivity analysis and the role of data based mechanistic modelling in hydrology. Hydrol. Earth System Sci, 11: 1249-1266.
35. Rogers, C.C.M., Beven, K.J., Morris, E.M. and Anderson, M.G. 1985. Sensitivity analysis, calibration and predictive uncertainty of the institute of hydrology distributed model. J. Hydrol, 81: 179-191.
36. Schmidtke, K.D. 1999. Land im Wind-Wetter und Klima in Schleswig-Holstein Wachholtz Verlag
37. Schmitz, O., Karssenberg, D., van Deursen, W.P.A. and Wesseling, C.G. 2009. Linking external components to a spatio-temporal modelling framework: coupling MODFLOW and PCRaster. Environ. Model. Software, 24: 1088-1099.
38. Schuol, J. and Abbaspour, K. C. 2006. Calibration and uncertainty issues of a hydrological model (SWAT) applied to West Africa. Adv. Geosci, 9: 137-143.
39. Son, K. and Sivapalan, M. 2007. Improving model structure and reducing parameter uncertainty in conceptual water balance models through the use of auxiliary data. Water Resour. Res, 43(1) doi:10.1029/2006WR005032
40. Sponagel, H. 2005. Bodenkundliche Kartieranleitung, Hannover: Adhocarbeitsgruppe Boden der Staatlichen Geologischen Dienste und der Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe. 5. Verbesserte und erweiterte Auflage.
41. Springer, P. 2006. "Analyse der Interaktion zwischen Oberflächenwasser und Grundwasser am Beispiel einer Flussniederung im Norddeutschen Tiefland". In Diplomarbeit, Fach Geographie, Germany: Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel.
42. Takagi, K., Tsuboya, T. and Takahashi, H. 1998. Diurnal hystereses of stomatal and bulk surface conductances in relation to vapor pressure deficit in a cool temperate wetland. Agric. For. Met, 91: 177-191.
43. Trepel, M. 2004. "Development and application of a GIS-based peatland inventory for Schleswig Holstein (Germany)". In Proceedings of the 12th International Peat Congress-Wise Use of Peatlands Edited by: äivänen, J. P. Vol. 2, 931-936.
44. Uhlenbrook, S., Seibert, J., Leibundgut, Ch and Rodhe, A. 1999. Prediction uncertainty of conceptual rainfall-runoff models caused by problems to identify model parameters and structure. Hydrol. Sci. J, 44(5): 279-299.
45. Van der Knijff, J. and de Roo, A. 2008. LISFLOOD Distributed Water Balance and Flood Simulation Model Revised user manual. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, EUR 22166 EN/2
46. Van Deursen, W.P.A. 1995. Geographical Information Systems and Dynamic Models: development and application of a prototype spatial modelling language. Netherlands Geographic Studies, Issue,: 190
47. Vrugt, J.A., Clark, M.P. and Diks, C.G.H. 2006. Multi-objective calibration of forecast ensembles using Bayesian model averaging. Geophys. Res. Lett, 33(19): 1-6.
48. Vrugt, J.A., Diks, C.G.H., Gupta, H.V., Bouten, W. and Verstraten, J.M. 2005. Improved treatment of uncertainty in hydrologic modelling: combining the strengths of global optimization and data assimilation. Water Resour. Res, 41(1): 1-17.
49. Wan, R., Yang, G., Li, H. and Yang, L. 2007. Simulating flood events in a mesoscale watershed: a case study from River Xitiaoxi Watershed in the upper region of Taihu basin. J. Lake Sci, 19(2): 170-176.
50. Wesseling, C.G., Karssenberg, D.J., Burrough, P.A. and Van Deursen, W.P.A. 1996. Integrated dynamic environmental models in GIS: the development of a dynamic modelling language. Trans. GIS, 1(1): 40-48.
51. Wu, K. and Johnston, C.A. 2008. Hydrologic comparison between a forested and a wetland/lake dominated watershed using SWAT. Hydrol. Processes, 22: 1431-1442.
52. Xu, L., Zhang, Q., Li, H., Viney, N.R., Xu, J. and Liu, J. 2007. Modelling of surface runoff in Xitiaoxi catchment. China. Water Resour. Manage, 21: 1313-1323. doi:10.1007/s11269-006-9083-6
53. Yang, J., Reichert, P. and Abbaspour, K.C. 2007. Bayesian uncertainty analysis in distributed hydrologic modelling: a case study in the Thur River basin (Switzerland). Water Resour. Res, 43: 1-13. W10401, doi:10.1029/2006WR005497
54. Zhang, Q., Li, H. and Xu, L. 2006. Surface runof modelling for Xitiaoxi catchment, Taihu Basin. J. Lake Sci, 18(4): 401-406.
55. Zhang, X., Hörmann, G. and Fohrer, N. 2007. "The effects of different model complexity on the quality of discharge simulation for a lowland catchment in northern Germany. Heft 20.07". In Einfluss von Bewirtschaftung und Klima auf Wasser- und Stoffhaushalt von Gewässern (2007), Band 2, Forum für Hydrologie und Wasserbewirtschaftung, ISBN 978-3-940173-04-1
56. Zhang, X., Hörmann, G. and Fohrer, N. 2008. An investigation of the effects of model structure on model performance to reduce discharge simulation uncertainty in two catchments. Adv. Geosci, 18: 31-35.
57. Zhang, X., Hörmann, G. and Fohrer, N. 2009. Hydrologic comparison between a lowland catchment (Kielstau, Germany) and a mountainous catchment (XitaoXi, China) using KIDS model in PCRaster. Adv. Geosci, 7: 1-6.