Uncertainty-based evaluation and comparison of SWAT and HSPF applications to the Illinois River Basin

Journal of Hydrology

Volumn 481, Issue , 2013, Pages 119-131

  Xie, Hua ^a   Lian, Yanqing ^b  

^a INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b ILLINOIS STATE WATER SURVEY   (United States)

Author keywords

Calibration; HSPF; Model comparison; SWAT; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

ACCURATE PREDICTION; CALIBRATION DATA; CALIBRATION PROCEDURE; DISCHARGE OBSERVATIONS; GENERALIZED LIKELIHOOD UNCERTAINTY ESTIMATION; HSPF; HSPF MODELS; HYDROLOGIC DATA; HYDROLOGIC SIMULATIONS; ILLINOIS RIVER; ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN; MODEL COMPARISON; MODEL FIT; MODELING TOOL; MONTE CARLO SAMPLING; MULTI-CRITERIA; MULTI-SITE; PARAMETER SET; POLICY MAKING; RELATIVE PERFORMANCE; RIVER BASIN SIMULATION MODEL; SOIL AND WATER ASSESSMENT TOOL; SUMMARY STATISTIC; SWAT; SWAT MODEL; UNCERTAINTY; WATERSHED DELINEATION;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DECISION MAKING; GLUES; GLUING; MONTE CARLO METHODS; WATERSHEDS;

CALIBRATION;

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; BASIN MANAGEMENT; CALIBRATION; DATA SET; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; NUMERICAL MODEL; POLICY MAKING; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ILLINOIS; ILLINOIS RIVER; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84873087785     PISSN: 00221694     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.12.027     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Arabi M., Govindaraju R.S., Hantush M.M. A probabilistic approach for analysis of uncertainty in the evaluation of watershed management practices. J. Hydrol. 2007, 333(2-4):459-471.
2. Arnold J.G., Srinivasin R., Muttiah R.S., Williams J.R. Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment: Part I. Model development. J. Am. Water Res. Assoc. 1998, 34(1):73-89.
3. Aronica G., Hankin B., Beven K. Uncertainty and equifinality in calibrating distributed roughness coefficients in a flood propagation model with limited data. Adv. Water Resour. 1998, 22(4):349-365.
4. Beven K.J., Binley A.M. The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrol. Process. 1992, 6(3):279-298.
5. Bicknell, B.R., Imhoff, J.C., Kittle Jr., J.L., Jobes, T.H., Donigian Jr., A.S., 2005. Hydrological Simulation Program - Fortran (HSPF). User's Manual for Release 12.2. U.S. EPA National Exposure Research Laboratory, Athens, GA, in cooperation with U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division, Reston, VA.
6. Bracmort K.S., Arabi M., Frankenberger J.R., Engel B.A., Arnold J.G. Modeling long-term water quality impact of structural BMPs. Trans. ASAE 2006, 49(2):367-374.
7. Chin D.A., Sakura-Lemessy D., Bosch D.D., Gay P.A. Watershed-scale fate and transport of bacteria. Trans. ASAE 2009, 52(1):145-154.
8. Deb K., Pratap A., Agarwal S., Meyarivan T. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 2002, 6(2):182-197.
9. Eheart J.W., Tornil D.W. Low-flow frequency exacerbation by irrigation withdrawals in the agricultural Midwest under various climate change scenarios. Water Resour. Res. 1999, 35(7):2237-2246.
10. Ferrari J.R., Lookingbill T.R., McCormick B., Townsend P.A., Eshleman K. Surface mining and reclamation effects on flood response of watersheds in the central Appalachian Plateau region. Water Resour. Res. 2009, 45.
11. Gallagher M., Doherty J. Parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis for a watershed model. Environ. Modell. Softw. 2007, 22(7):1000-1020.
12. Goncu S., Albek E. Modeling the effects of climate change on different land uses. Water Sci. Technol. 2007, 56(1):131-138.
13. Green C.H., Van Griensven A. Autocalibration in hydrologic modeling: using SWAT2005 in small-scale watersheds. Environ. Modell. Softw. 2008, 23(4):422-434.
14. Green C.H., Arnold J.G., Williams J.R., Haney R., Harmel R.D. Soil and water assessment tool hydrologic and water quality evaluation of poultry litter application to small-scale subwatersheds in Texas. Trans. ASAE 2007, 50(4):1199-1209.
15. Gupta H.V., Sorooshian S., Yapo P.O. Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: multiple and noncommensurable measures of information. Water Resour. Res. 1998, 34(4):751-763. 10.1029/97WR03495.
16. Holvoet K., Van Griensven A., Seuntjens P., Vanrolleghem P.A. Sensitivity analysis for hydrology and pesticide supply towards the river in SWAT. Phys. Chem. Earth A/B/C 2005, 30(8-10):518-526.
17. Hornberger G.M., Spear R.C. An approach to the preliminary analysis of environmental systems. J. Environ. Manage. 1981, 12:7-18.
18. Im S.J., Brannan K.M., Mostaghimi S., Kim S.M. Comparison of HSPF and SWAT models performance for runoff and sediment yield prediction. J. Environ. Sci. Health, Part A: Environ. Sci. Eng. 2007, 42(11):1561-1570.
19. Iskra I., Droste R. Application of non-linear automatic optimization techniques for calibration of HSPF. Water Environ. Res. 2007, 79(6):647-659.
20. Jia Y.B., Culver T.B. Uncertainty analysis for watershed modeling using generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation with multiple calibration measures. J. Water Res. Pl. - ASCE 2008, 134(2):97-106.
21. Lian Y.Q., Chan I.C., Singh J., Demissie M., Knapp V., Xie H. Coupling of hydrologic and hydraulic models for the Illinois River Basin. J. Hydrol. 2007, 344(3-4):210-222.
22. Lian Y.Q., Chan I., Xie H., Demissie M. Improving HSPF modeling accuracy from FTABLES: a case study for the Illinois River Basin. J. Hydrol. Eng. - ASCE 2010, 15(8):642-650.
23. Mishra A., Kar S., Raghuwanshi N.S. Modeling nonpoint source pollutant losses from a small watershed using HSPF model. J. Environ. Eng. - ASCE 2009, 135(2):92-100.
24. Muleta M.K., Nicklow J.W. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis coupled with automatic calibration for a distributed watershed model. J. Hydrol. 2005, 306(1-4):127-145.
25. Nash J.E., Sutcliffe J.V. River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I-a discussion of principles. J. Hydrol. 1970, 10(3):282-290.
26. Nasr A., Bruen M., Jordan P., Moles R., Kiely G., Byrne P. A comparison of SWAT, HSPF and SHETRAN/GOPC for modelling phosphorus export from three catchments in Ireland. Water Res. 2007, 41(5):1065-1073.
27. Neitsch S.L., Arnold J.G., Kiniry J.R., Williams J.R. Soil and Water Assessment Tool Theoretical Documentation, Version 2005 2005, GSWR Agricultural Research Service & Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Temple Texas.
28. Parker R., Arnold J.G., Barrett M., Burns L., Carrubba L., Neitsch S.L., Snyder N.J., Srinivasan R. Evaluation of three watershed-scale pesticide environmental transport and fate models. J. Am. Water Res. Assoc. 2007, 43(6):1424-1443.
29. Ryu J.H. Application of HSPF to the distributed model intercomparison project: case study. J. Hydrol. Eng. - ASCE 2009, 14(8):847-857.
30. Saleh A., Du B. Evaluation of SWAT and HSPF within BASINS program for the Upper North Bosque River watershed in Central Texas. Trans. ASAE 2004, 47(4):1039-1049.
31. Sangrey D.A., Harrop-Williams K.O., Klaiber J.A. Predicting groundwater response to precipitation. J. Geotech. Eng. - ASCE 1984, 110(7):957-975.
32. SCS Section 4: Hydrology. National Engineering Handbook 1972, USDA Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC.
33. Singh J., Knapp H.V., Arnold J.G., Misganaw D. Hydrological modeling of the Iroquois river watershed using HSPF and SWAT. J. Am. Water Res. Assoc. 2005, 41(2):343-360.
34. Tolson B.A., Shoemaker C.A. Cannonsville reservoir watershed SWAT2000 model development, calibration and validation. J. Hydrol. 2007, 337(1-2):68-86.
35. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1994. State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) Database. Miscellaneous Publication No. 1492.
36. Van Liew M.W., Arnold J.G., Garbrecht J.D. Hydrologic simulation on agricultural watersheds: choosing between two models. Trans. ASAE 2003, 46(6):1539-1551.
37. Venetis C. A study of the recession of unconfined aquifers. Bull. Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol. 1969, 14(4):119-125.
38. Vogelmann J.E., Howard S.M., Yang L., Larson C.R., Wylie B.K., Van Driel J.N. Completion of the 1990's national land cover data set for the conterminous United States. Photogramm. Eng. Rem. Sens. 2001, 67:650-662.
39. White K.L., Chaubey I. Sensitivity analysis, calibration, and validations for a multisite and multivariable SWAT model. J. Am. Water Res. Assoc. 2005, 41(5):1077-1089.
40. White M.J., Storm D.E., Busteed P.R., Smolen M.D., Zhang H.L., Fox G.A. A quantitative phosphorus loss assessment tool for agricultural fields. Environ. Modell. Softw. 2010, 25(10):1121-1129.
41. Xie H., Eheart J.W., An H. Hydrologic and economic implications of climate change for typical River Basins of the agricultural Midwestern United States. J. Water Res. Pl. - ASCE 2008, 134(3):205-213.