The distributed model intercomparison project - Phase 2: Experiment design and summary results of the western basin experiments

Journal of Hydrology

Volumn 507, Issue , 2013, Pages 300-329

  Smith, Michael ^a   Koren, Victor ^a   Zhang, Ziya ^a,o   Moreda, Fekadu ^b   Cui, Zhengtao ^a   Cosgrove, Brian ^a   Mizukami, Naoki ^a,c   Kitzmiller, David ^a   Ding, Feng ^a,d   Reed, Seann ^a   Anderson, Eric ^a   Schaake, John ^a   Zhang, Yu ^a   Andréassian, Vazken ^e   Perrin, Charles ^e   Coron, Laurent ^e   Valéry, Audrey ^e,p   Khakbaz, Behnaz ^f   Sorooshian, Soroosh ^g   Behrangi, Ali ^h   Imam, Bisher ⁱ   Hsu, Kuo Lin ^g   Todini, Ezio ^j   Coccia, Gabriele ^j   Mazzetti, Cinzia ^k   Ortiz Andres, Enrique ^l   Francés, Félix ^m   Orozco, Ismael ^m   Hartman, Robert ⁿ   Henkel, Arthur ⁿ   Fickenscher, Peter ⁿ   Staggs, Scott ⁿ   more..

^a NOAA EARTH SYSTEM RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

^b RTI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^c NATIONAL CENTER FOR ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH   (United States)

^d ADNET SYSTEMS INC   (United States)

^e Procédés biotechnologiques au service de l'environnement   (France)

^f URS CORPORATION   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^h CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

ⁱ UNESCO   (France)

^j UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^k PROGEA srl   (Italy)

^l Idrologia e Ambiente Srl   (Italy)

^m UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE VALÈNCIA   (Spain)

ⁿ NWS California Nevada River Forecast Center   (United States)

^o UNIVERSITY CORPORATION FOR ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH   (United States)

^p EDF R AND D   (France)

more..

Author keywords

Calibration; Distributed model; Hydrologic model; Lumped model; Rainfall runoff; Simulation

Indexed keywords

DISTRIBUTED MODELING; HYDROLOGIC MODELING; LUMPED MODELING; RAINFALL RUNOFF; SIMULATION;

BENCHMARKING; CALIBRATION; EXPERIMENTS; FLOODS; FORECASTING; RAIN; RUNOFF; SNOW; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; STREAM FLOW; WATER RESOURCES;

COMPUTER SIMULATION;

CALIBRATION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DATA QUALITY; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; NUMERICAL MODEL; PEAK FLOW; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING; STREAMFLOW; WATERSHED;

CALIFORNIA; FRANCE; ITALY; OKLAHOMA [UNITED STATES]; SIERRA NEVADA [CALIFORNIA]; SPAIN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84888824242     PISSN: 00221694     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.08.040     Document Type: Article

References (174)

1. Ajami N.K., Gupta H., Wagener T., Sorooshian S. Calibration of a semi-distributed hydrologic model for streamflow estimation along a river system. J. Hydrol. 2004, 298:112-135.
2. Anderson, E.A., 1976. National Weather Service River Forecast System, Snow Accumulation and Ablation Model, NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS HYDRO-17.
3. Anderson, E.A., 2002. Calibration of Conceptual Hydrologic Models for Use in River Forecasting. <>. http://www.weather.gov/oh/hrl/hsmb/hydrology/calibration/index.html.
4. Anderson, E.A., 2006. Snow Accumulation and Ablation Model -SNOW-17. <>. http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hrl/nwsrfs/users_manual/part2/_pdf/22snow17.pdf.
5. Andréassian V., Hall A., Chahinian N., Schaake J. Introduction and synthesis: Why should hydrologists work on a large number of basin data sets? 2006, vol. 307. IAHS Publ., pp. 1-5.
6. Andréassian V., Perrin C., Berthet L., Le Moine N., Lerat J., Loumagne C., Oudin L., Mathevet T., Ramos H.M., Valéry A. Crash tests for a standardized evaluation of hydrological models. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2009, 13:1757-1764. 10.5194/hess-13-1757-2009.
7. Bales R.C., Molotch N.P., painter T.H., Dettinger M.D., Rice R., Dozier J. Mountain hydrology of the western United States. Water Resour. Res. 2006, 42:W08432. 10.1029/2005WR004387.
8. Behrangi A., Hsu K.-L., Imam B., Sorooshian S., Huffman G.J., Kuligowski R.J. PERSIANN-MSA: a precipitation estimation method from satellite-based multispectral analysis. J. Hydrometerol. 2009, 10:1414-1429. 10.1175/2009JHM1139.1.
9. Benjamin S.G., Devenyu D., Weygandt S.S., Brundage K.J., Brown J.M., Grell G.A., Kim D., Schwartz B.E., Smirnova T.G., Smith T.L., Manikin G.S. An hourly assimilation-forecast cycle: The RUC. Mon. Weather Rev. 2004, 132:495-518. 10.1175/1520-0493(2004)132%3C0495:AHACTR%3E2.0.CO;2.
10. Bennett N.D., Croke B.F.W., Guariso G., Guillaume J.H.A., Hamilton S.H., Jakeman A.J., Marsili-Libelli S., Newham L.T.H., Norton J.P., Perrin C., Pierce S.A., Robson B., Seppelt R., Voinov A.A., Fath B.D., Andréassian V. Characterizing performance of environmental models. Environ. Model. Softw. 2013, 40:1-20. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.09.011.
11. Blöschl G. Scaling issues in snow hydrology. Hydrol. Process. 1999, 13:2149-2175. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1085(199910)13:14/15<2149::AID-HYP847>3.0.CO;2-8.
12. Boushaki F.I., Hsu K.-L., Sorooshian S., Park G.-H. Bias adjustment of satellite precipitation estimation using ground-based measurement: a case study evaluation over the southwestern United States. J. Hydrometeorol. 2009, 10:1231-1242. 10.1175/2009JHM1099.1.
13. Braun L.N., Brun E., Durand Y., Martin E., Tourasse P. Simulation of discharge using different methods of meteorological data distribution, basin discretization, and snow modeling. Nord. Hydrol. 1994, 25(1-2):129-144. 10.2166/nh.1994.009.
14. Budyko M.I. Climate and Life 1974, Academic Press, New York.
15. Burnash R.J.C. The NWS river forecast system - catchment modeling. Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology 1995, 311-366. Water Resources Publications, Littleton, Colorado. V.P. Singh (Ed.).
16. Butts M.B., Payne J.T., Kristensen M., Madsen H. An evaluation of the impact of model structure on hydrological modelling uncertainty for streamflow simulation. J. Hydrol. 2004, 298:242-266. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.03.042.
17. Carpenter T.M., Georgakakos K.P. Assessment of Folsom lake response to historical and potential future climate scenarios: 1. Forecasting. J. Hydrol. 2001, 249:148-175.
18. Carroll, T., Cline, D., Fall, G., Nilsson, A., Li, L., Rost, A., 2001. NOHRSC Operations and the Simulation of Snow Cover Properties of the Coterminous U.S. Proceedings of the 69th Annual Meeting of the Western Snow Conference, Sun Valley, ID, Western Snow Conference, pp. 1-14.
19. Cayan D.R., Riddle L.G. The influence of precipitation and temperature on seasonal streamflow in California. Water Resour. Res. 1993, 29(4):1127-1140.
20. Clark M.P., McMillan H.K., Collins D.B.G., Kavetski D., Woods R.A. Hydrological field data from a modeller's perspective: Part 2: process-based evaluation of model hypotheses. Hydrol. Process. 2011, 25:523-543. 10.1002/hyp.7902.
21. Clarke R.T. A critique of present procedures used to compare performance of rainfall-runoff models. J. Hydrol. 2008, 352:379-387. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.01.026.
22. Cline D., Elder K., Bales R. Scale effects in a distributed snow water equivalence and snowmelt model for mountain basins. Hydrol. Process. 1998, 12(10-11):1527-1536.
23. Coccia, G., Mazzetti, C., Ortiz, E.A., Todini, E., 2009. Application of the Topkapi model within the DMIP 2 project. In: Paper 4.2, 23rd Conference on Hydrology, 89th Meeting of the AMS, Phoenix, Arizona, January 10-16. <>. https://ams.confex.com/ams/89annual/techprogram/paper_149632.htm.
24. Confalonieri R., Bregaglio S., Bocchi S., Acutis M. An integrated procedure to evaluate hydrological models. Hydrol. Process. 2010, 24:2762-2770. 10.1002/hyp.7683.
25. Daly C. Guidelines for assessing the suitability of spatial climate data sets. Int. J. Climatol. 2006, 26:707-721. 10.1002/joc.1322.
26. Daly C., Neilson R.P., Phillips D.L. A statistical-topographic model for mapping climatological precipitation over mountainous terrain. J. Appl. Meteorol. 1994, 33:140-158.
27. Daly C., Halbleib M., Smith J.I., Gibson W.P., Dogget M.K., Taylor G.H., Curtis J., Pasteris P.P. Physiographically sensitive mapping of climatological temperature and precipitation across the conterminous United States. Int. J. Climatol. 2008, 10.1002/joc.1688.
28. De Pondeca M.S.F.V., Manikin G.S., DiMego G., Benjamin S.G., et al. The real-time mesoscale analysis at NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Prediction: current status and development. Weather Forecast. 2011, 26:593-612. 10.1175/WAF-D-10-05037.1.
29. Debele B., Srinivasan R., Gosain A.K. Comparison of process-based and temperature-index snowmelt modeling in SWAT. Water Resour. Manage 2009, 10.1007/s11269-009-9486-2.
30. Dettinger M., Redmond K., Cayan D. Winter orographic precipitation ratios in the Sierra Nevada-large-scale atmospheric circulations and hydrologic consequences. J. Hydrometeorol. 2004, 5:1102-1116.
31. Dong X., Dohmen-Hansssen M., Booij M.J. Appropriate spatial sampling of rainfall for flow simulation. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2005, 50(2):279-298.
32. Dornes P.F., Pomeroy J.W., Pietroniro A., Carey S.K., Qinton W.L. Influence of landscape aggregation in modeling snow-cover ablation and snowmelt runoff in a sub-arctic mountainous environment. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2008, 53(3):725-740.
33. Dressler K.A., Fassnacht S.R., Bales R.C. A comparison of snow telemetry and snow course measurements in the Colorado River Basin. J. Hydrometeorol. 2006, 7:705-712.
34. Duan Q., Gupta V.K., Sorooshian S. A shuffled complex evolution approach for effective and efficient global minimization. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 1993, 76:501-521.
35. Duan Q., Sorooshian S., Gupta V.K. Optimal use of the SCE-UA global optimization method for calibrating watershed models. J. Hydrol. 1994, 158:265-284.
36. Duan Q.Y., Schaake J.C., Koren V.I. FIFE 1987 water budget analysis. J. Geophys. Res. 1996, 101(D3):7197-7207.
37. Duan Q.Y., Schaake J.S., Andréassian V., Franks S., Goteti G., Gupta H.V., Gusev Y.M., Habets F., Hall A., Hay L., Hogue T., Huang M., Leavesley G., Liang X., Nasonova O.N., Noilhan J., Oudin L., Sorooshian S., Wagener T., Wood E.F. Model parameter estimation experiment (MOPEX): an overview of science strategy and major results from the second and third workshops. J. Hydrol. 2006, 320:3-17. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.07.031.
38. Eischeid J.K., Pasteris P.A., Diaz H.F., Plantico M.S., Lott N.J. Creating a serially complete, national daily time series of temperature and precipitation for the western United States. J. Appl. Meteorol. 2000, 39:1580-1591.
39. Essery R., Martin E., Douville H., Fernanndez A., Brun E. A comparison of four snow models using observations from an alpine site. Clim. Dyn. 1999, 15:583-593.
40. Etchevers P., Martin E., Brown R., Fierz C., et al. Validation of the energy budget of an alpine snowpack simulated by several snow models (SnowMIP project). Ann. Glaciol. 2004, 38(1):140-158. 10.3189/172756404781814825.
41. Ewen J. Hydrograph matching method for measuring model performance. J. Hydrol. 2011, 408:178-187. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.07.038.
42. Farnsworth, R.K., Thompson, E.S., Peck, E.L., 1982. Evaporation Atlas for the Contiguous 48 United States. NOAA Technical Report NWS 33, 27pp.
43. Feng X., Sahoo A., Arsenault K., Houser P., Luo Y., Troy T.J. The impact of snow model complexity at three CLPX sites. J. Hydrometeorol. 2008, 9:1464-1481. 10.1175/2008JHM860.1.
44. Fierz C., Riber P., Adams E.E., Curran A.R., Föhn P.M.B., Lehning M., Pluss C. Evaluation of snow-surface energy balance models in alpine terrain. J. Hydrol. 2003, 282:76-94. 10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00255-5.
45. Francés F., Vélez J.I., Vélez J.J. Split-parameter structure for the automatic calibration of distributed hydrological models. J. Hydrol. 2007, 332(1):226-240.
46. Franz K.J., Hogue T.S., Sorooshian S. Operational snow modelling: addressing the challenges of an energy balance model for National Weather Service forecasts. J. Hydrol. 2008, 360:48-66.
47. Franz K.J., Hogue T.S., Sorooshian S. Snow model verification using ensemble prediction and operational benchmarks. J. Hydrometeorol. 2008, 9:1402-1415. 10.1175/2008JHM995.1.
48. Garen D.C., Marks D. Spatially distributed energy balance snowmelt modelling in a mountainous river basin: estimation of meteorological inputs and verification of model results. J. Hydrol. 2005, 315:126-153.
49. Georgakakos, A.P., Yao, H., Georgakakos, K.P., 2010. Upstream Regulation Adjustments to Ensemble Streamflow Predictions. HRC Technical Report No. 7; Sponsored by NOAA/NWS/OHD, Award No. NA08NWS4620023.
50. Gourley J.J., Jorgensen D.P., Matrosov S.Y., Flamig Z.L. Evaluation of incremental improvements to quantitative precipitation estimates in complex terrain. J. Hydrometeorol. 2009, 10:1507-1520.
51. Green, D.R., Hudlow, M.D., 1982. Hydrometeorologic grid mapping procedures. In: AWRA International Symposium on Hydrometeorology, Denver, CO., Available on Request from NWS/OHD.
52. Guan B., Molotch N.P., Waliser D.E., Fetzer E.J., Neiman P.J. Extreme snowfall events linked to atmospheric rivers and surface air temperature via satellite measurements. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2010, 37:L20401. 10.1029/2010GL044696.
53. Guentchev G., Barsugli J.J., Eischeid J. Homogeneity of gridded precipitation datasets for the Colorado River basin. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 2010, 49:2404-2415. 10.1175/2010JAMC2484.1.
54. Guirguis K.J., Avissar R. An analysis of precipitation variability, persistence, and observational data uncertainty in the Western United States. J. Hydrometeorol. 2008, 9:843-865. 10.1175/2008JHM972.1.
55. Gupta H.V., Wagener T., Lui Y. Reconciling theory with observations: elements of a diagnostic approach to model evaluation. Hydrol. Process. 2008, 22:3802-3813. 10.1002/hyp.6989.
56. Hansen M.C., Defries R.S., Townshend J.R.G., Sohlbert R. Global land cover classification at 1 km spatial resolution using a classification tree approach. Int. J. Rem. Sens. 2000, 21(6&7):1331-1364.
57. Hartman, R.K., 2010. Hydrologic forecasting in mountainous terrain. In: Presentation H21H-05, Presented at 2010 Fall Meeting, AGU, San Francisco, Calif., 13-17 December.
58. Hay L.E., Clark M.P. Use of statistically and dynamically downscaled atmospheric model output for hydrologic simulations in three mountainous basins in the western United States. J. Hydrol. 2003, 282:56-75.
59. Hay, L, Viger, R., McCabe, G., 1998. Precipitation interpolation in mountainous regions using multiple linear regression. In: Preceedings '98 Conference on Hydrology, Water Resources, and Ecology in Headwaters, IAHS Publication 248, 33-38.
60. Hogue T.S., Sorooshian S., Gupta H., Holz A., Braatz D. Multi-step automatic calibration scheme for river forecasting models. J. Hydrometerol. 2000, 1:524-542.
61. Jankov I., Schultz P.J., Anderson C.J., Koch S.E. The impact of different physical parameterizations and their interactions on cold season QPF in the American River Basin. J. Hydrometeorol. 2007, 8:1141-1151. 10.1175/JHM630.1.
62. Jenson S.K., Domingue J.O. Extracting topographic structure from digital elevation data for geographic information system analysis. Photogramm. Eng. Rem. Sens. 1988, 54:1593-1600.
63. Jeton A.E., Smith J.L. Development of watershed models for two Sierra Nevada basins using a geographic information system. Water Resour. Bull. 1993, 29(6):923-932.
64. Jeton, A.E., Dettinger, M.D., Smith, J.L., 1996. Potential Effects of Climate Change on Streamflow, Eastern and Western Slopes of the Sierra Nevada, California and Nevada. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 95-4260, 44pp.
65. Jones, E.T., Roth, K., Costanza, K., 2009. A comparison of the NWS distributed versus lumped hydrologic model. In: AMS 23 Conference on Hydrology, Paper 4.3, Phoenix Arizona, January 10-15.
66. Kabeche, F., Figueras, J., Fradon, B., Hogan, R., Boumahmoud, A.-A., Illingworth, A., Tabary, P., 2010. Towards X-band polarimetric quantitative precipitation estimation in mountainous regions: the RHYTMME project. In: ERAD 2010 - the Sixth European Conference on Radar in Meteorology and Hydrology, Sibiu Romania, 6-10 September.
67. Kampf S.K., Burges S.J. A framework for classifying and comparing distributed hillslope and catchment hydrologic models. Water Resour. Res. 2007, 43:W05423. 10.1029/2006WR005370.
68. Kapnick S., Hall A. Observed climate-snowpack relationships in California and their implications for the future. J. Clim. 2010, 23:3446-3456.
69. Khakbaz B., Imam B., Hsu K., Sorooshian S. From lumped to distributed: calibration strategies for semi-distributed hydrologic models. J. Hydrol. 2012, 418-419:61-77. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.02.021.
70. Kienzle S. A new temperature based method to separate rain and snow. Hydrol. Process. 2008, 22:5067-5085. 10.1002/hyp.7131.
71. Kim J., Miller N.L., Guetter A.K., Georgakakos K.P. River flow response to precipitation and snow budget in California during the 1994/1995 winter. J. Clim. 1998, 11:2376-2386.
72. Kingsmill D.E., White A.B., Neiman P.J., Ralph F.M. Synoptic and topographic variability of Northern California precipitation characteristics in land-falling winter storms observed during CALJET. Mon. Weather Rev. 2006, 134:2072-2094. 10.1175/MWR3166.1.
73. Kirchner J.W. Getting the right answers for the right reasons: linking measurements, analyses, and models to advance the science of hydrology. Water Resour. Res. 2006, 42:W03S04. 10.1029/2005WR004362.
74. Koren, V., Schaake, J., Duan, Q., Smith, M., Cong, S., 1998. PET Upgrades to NWSRFS. Internal NWS/OHD report. Available at: <>. http://amazon.nws.noaa.gov/ohd/publications/publications_google.php.
75. Koren V., Schaake J., Mitchell K., Duan Q.-Y., Chen F., Baker J.M. A parameterization of snowpack and frozen ground intended for NCEP weather and climate models. J. Geophys. Res. 1999, 104(D16):19569-19585.
76. Koren V., Reed S., Smith M., Zhang Z., Seo D.-J. Hydrology laboratory research modeling system (HL-RMS) of the U.S. National Weather Service. J. Hydrol. 2004, 291:297-318.
77. Koren, V., Moreda, F., Reed, S., Smith, M., Zhang, Z., 2006. Evaluation of a grid-based distributed hydrological model over a large area. In: Predictions in Ungaged Basins: Promise and Progress (Proceedings of Symposium S7 Held During the Seventh IAHS Scientific Assembly at Foz do Iguacu, Brazil, April 2005. IAHS Publication 303, pp. 47-56.
78. Krause P., Boyle D.P., Bäse F. Comparison of different efficiency criteria for hydrological model assessment. Adv. Geosci. 2005, 5:89-97. 10.5194/adgeo-5-89-2005.
79. Kuligowski R.J. A self-calibrating real-time GOES rainfall algorithm for short-term rainfall estimates. J. Hydrometeorol. 2002, 3:112-130. 10.1175/1525-7541(2002) 003<0112:ASCRTG>2.0.CO;2.
80. Kuligowski R.J., Li Y., Zhang Y. Impact of TRMM data on a low-latency, high-resolution precipitation algorithm for flash-flood forecasting. J. Appl. Met. Clim. 2013, 52:1379-1393. 10.1175/JAMC-D-12-0107.1.
81. Kuzmin V., Seo D.-J., Koren V. Fast and efficient optimization of hydrologic model parameters using a priori estimates and stepwise line search. J. Hydrol. 2008, 353:109-128.
82. Le Moine, N., 2008. The Surface Catchment Seen from Underground: A Way to Improve the Performance and Realism of Rainfall-runoff Models? PhD Thesis, University Pierre et Marie Curie (Paris), CEMAGREF (Antony), 324pp. <>. http://webgr.irstea.fr/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2008-LE_MOINE-THESE.pdf.
83. Leavesley G.H., Hay L.E., Viger R.J., Marskstrom S.L. Use of a priori parameter-estimation methods to constrain calibration of distributed-parameter models. Calibration of Watershed Models. Water Science and Application 2003, 255-266. AGU Press. Duan (Ed.).
84. Lei, F., Koren, V., Smith, M., Moreda, F., 2007. A sensitivity study of an energy-budget snow accumulation and ablation model. In: Proceedings of the Paper J6.4, 87th Annual Meeting of the AMS, 21st Conference on Hydrology, 13-18 January.
85. Lettenmaier D.P., Gan T.Y. Hydrologic sensitivities of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River basin, California, to global warming. Water Resour. Res. 1990, 26(1):69-86.
86. Leydecker A., Sickman J.O., Melack J.M. Spatial scaling of the hydrological and biochemical aspects of high-altitude catchments in the Sierra Nevada, California, USA. Arct. Antarct. Alp. Res. 2001, 33(4):391-396.
87. Liston G.E., Hiemstra C.A., Elder K., Cline D.W. Mesocell study area snow distributions for the cold land processes experiment (CLPX). J. Hydrometeorol. 2008, 9:957-976. 10.1175/2008JHM869.1.
88. Liu Z., Todini E. Towards a comprehensive physically-based rainfall-runoff model. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2001, 6:859-881.
89. Lohmann D., Lettenmaier D.P., Liang X., Wood E.F., Boone A., Chang S., Chen F., Dai Y., Desborough C., Dickinson R.E., Duan Q., Ek M., Gusev Y.M., Habets F., Irannejad P., Koster R., Mitchell K.E., Nasonova O.N., Noilhan J., Schaake J., Schlosser A., Shao Y., Shmakin A.B., Verseghy D., Warrach K., Wetzel P., Xue Y., Yang Z.-L., Zeng Q.C. The project for intercomparison of land-surface parameterization schemes (PILPS) phase 2(c) Red-Arkansas River basin experiment: 3. Spatial and temporal analysis of water fluxes. Global Planet. Change 1998, 19:161-179.
90. Lohmann, D., Mitchell, K.E., Houser, P.R., Wood, E.F., Schaake, J.C., Robock, A., Cosgrove, B.A., Sheffield, J., Duan, Q.-Y., Luo, L., Higgins, R.W., Pinker, R.T., Tarpley, J.D., 2004. Streamflow and water balance intercomparisons of four land surface models in the North American Land Data Assimilation System project, J. Geophys. Res. 109, D07S91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003517.
91. Lundquist J.D., Cayan D.R. Seasonal and spatial patterns in diurnal cycles in streamflow in the western United States. J. Hydrometeorol. 2002, 3:591-603.
92. Lundquist J.D., Loheide S.P. How evaporative water losses vary between wet and dry water years as a function of elevation in the Sierra Nevada, California, and critical factors for modeling. Water Resour. Res. 2011, 47:W00H09. 10.1029/2010WR010050.
93. Lundquist J.D., Neiman P.J., Martner B., White A.B., Gottas D.J., Ralph F.M. Rain versus snow in the Sierra Nevada, California: Comparing Doppler profiling radar and surface observations of melting level. J. Hydrometeorol. 2008, 9:194-211.
94. Mathevet, T., 2005. Which Lumped Rainfall-runoff Models at the Hourly Time Step? Empirical Development and Intercomparison of Models on a Large Set of Catchments. PhD Thesis, ENGREF (Paris), Cemagref (Antony), France, 463pp. <>. http://webgr.irstea.fr/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2005-MATHEVET-THESE.pdf.
95. Matrosov S.Y., Clark K.A., Kingsmill D.E. A polarimetric radar approach to identify rain, melting-layer, and snow regions for applying corrections to vertical profiles of reflectivity. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 2007, 46:154-166. 10.1175/JAM2508.1.
96. Maurer E.P., Mass C. Using radar data to partition precipitation into rain and snow in a hydrologic model. J. Hydrol. Eng. 2006, 11(3):214-221.
97. McCabe G.J., Clark M.P., Hay L.E. Rain-on-snow events in the western United States. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2007, 319-328. 10.1175/BAMS-88-3-319.
98. McCuen R.H., Snyder W.M. A proposed index for comparing hydrographs. Water Resour. Res. 1975, 11(6):1021-1024.
99. McDonnell J.J., Sivapalan M., Vache K., Dunn S., Grant G., Hatterty R., Hinz C., Hooper R., Kirchner J., Roderick M.L., Selker J., Weiler M. Moving beyond heterogeneity and process complexity: a new vision for watershed hydrology. Water Resour. Res. 2007, 43:W07301. 10.1029/2006WR005467.
100. Merz R., Parajka J., Blöschl G. Scale effects in conceptual hydrological modeling. Water Resour. Res. 2009, 45:W09405. 10.1029/2009WR007872.
101. Mesinger F., DiMego G., Kalnay E., Mitchell K., Shafran P.C., Ebisuzaki W., Jovic D., Woollen J., Rogers E., Berbery E.H., Ek M.B., Fan Y., Grumbine R., Higgins W., Li H., Lin Y., Manikin G., Parrish D., Shi W. North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR). Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2006, 87(3):343-360.
102. Miller, D.A., White, R.A., 1998. A conterminous United States multi-layer soil characteristics data set for regional climate and hydrology modeling. Earth Interact., 2, Paper No. 2. <>. http://www.EarthInteractions.org.
103. Minder J.R., Kingsmill D.E. Mesoscale variations of the atmospheric snow-line over the northern Sierra Nevada: multi-year statistics, case study, and mechanisms. J. Atmos. Sci. 2013, 70(3):916-938. 10.1175/JAS-D-12-0194.1.
104. Minder J.R., Durran D.R., Roe G.H. Mesoscale controls on the mountainside snow line. J. Atmos. Sci. 2011, 68:2107-2127. 10.1175/JAS-D-10-05006.1.
105. Mitchell K.E., et al. The multi-institutional North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS): utilizing multiple GCIP products and partners in a continental distributed hydrological modeling system. J. Geophys. Res. 2004, 109:D07S90. 10.1029/2003JD003823.
106. Mizukami, N., Koren, V., 2008. Methodology and evaluation of melt factor parameterization for distributed SNOW-17. In: Proceedings of the American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2008, Abstract #H31J-08.
107. Mizukami N., Smith M. Analysis of inconsistencies in multi-year high space-time resolution precipitation grids over complex terrain and impacts on hydrologic modeling. J. Hydrol. 2012, 428-429:129-141. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.01.030.
108. Mizukami N., Koren V., Smith M., Kingsmill D., Zhang Z., Cosgrove B., Cui Z. The impact of precipitation type discrimination on hydrologic simulation: rain-snow partitioning derived from HMT-West radar-retected brightband height versus surface temperature data. J. Hydrometeorol 2013, 14:1139-1158. 10.1175/JHM-D-12-035.1.
109. Molotch N.P., Bales R.C. SNOTEL representativeness in the Rio Grande headwaters on the basis of physiographics and remotely sensed snow cover persistence. Hydrol. Process. 2006, 20:723-739. 10.1002/hyp.6128.
110. Moreda, F., Cong, S., Schaake, J., Smith, M., 2006. Gridded rainfall estimation for distributed modeling in western mountainous areas. In: Poster H23A, Spring Meeting of the AGU, May 23-27, Baltimore, MD.
111. Moriasi D.N., Arnold J.G., Van Liew M.W., Bingner R.L., Harmel R.D., Vieth T.L. Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Trans. ASABE 2007, 50(3):885-900.
112. Nelson B.R., Seo D.-J., Kim D. Multisensor precipitation reanalysis. J. Hydrometeorol. 2010, 11:666-682. 10.1175/2010JHM1210.1.
113. National Research Council (NRC), 1998. Future of the National Weather Service Cooperative Observer Network. National Weather Service Modernization Committee, Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems, National Academy Press, 73pp. <>. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/6197.html.
114. Pan M., et al. Snow process modeling in the North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS): 2. Evaluation of model-simulated snow water equivalent. J. Geophys. Res. 2003, 108(D22):8850. 10.1029/2003JD003994.
115. Pandey G.R., Cayan D.R., Georgakakos K.P. Precipitation structure in the Sierra Nevada of California during winter. J. Geophys. Res. 1999, 104(D10):12019-12030.
116. Pandey G.R., Cayan D.R., Dettinger M.D., Georgakakos K.P. A hybrid orographic plus statistical model for downscaling daily precipitation in Northern California. J. Hydrometeorol. 2000, 1(December):491-506.
117. Parton W.J., Logan J.A. A model for diurnal variation in soil and air temperature. Agric. Meteorol. 1981, 23:205-216.
118. Perrin C., Michel C., Andréassian V. Improvement of a parsimonious model for streamflow simulation. J. Hydrol. 2003, 279:275-289. 10.1016/S0022-1694%2803%2900225-7.
119. Perrin C., Andréassian V., Michel C. Simple benchmark models as a basis for criteria of model efficiency. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 2006, 17(1-2):221-244. (Supplement 161/1-2, Large Rivers). 10.1127/lr/17/2006/221.
120. Puspalatha R., Perrin C., Le Moine N., Andréassian V. A review of efficiency criteria suitable for evaluating low-flow simulations. J. Hydrol. 2012, 420-421:171-182. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.11.055.
121. Ralph F.M., Dettinger M.D. Storms, floods, and the science of atmospheric rivers. Eos Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union 2011, 92(32):265-272.
122. Ralph F.M., et al. Improving short-term (0-48 h) cool-season quantitative precipitation forecasting: recommendations from a USWRP workshop. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2005, 86:1619-1632.
123. Reed S. Deriving flow directions for coarse resolution (1-4km) gridded hydrologic modeling. Water Resour. Res. 2003, 39(9):4-1-4-11.
124. Reed S.M., Maidment D.R. Coordinate transformations for using NEXRAD data in GIS-based hydrologic modeling. J. Hydrol. Eng. 1999, 4(174). 10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(1999)4:2(174).
125. Reed S., Koren V., Smith M., Zhang Z., Moreda F., Seo D.-J., Participants D.M.I.P. Overall distributed model intercomparison project results. J. Hydrol. 2004, 298(1-4):27-60.
126. Reek T., Doty S.R., Owen T.W. A deterministic approach to the validation of historical daily temperature and precipitation data from the cooperative network. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 1992, 73(6):753-762. 10.1175/1520-0477(1992)073<0753:ADATTV>2.0.CO;2.
127. Reynolds D.W., Dennis A.S. A review of the Sierra Cooperative Pilot Project. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 1986, 67(5):513-523.
128. Rice R., Bales R.C. Embedded-sensor network design for snow cover measurements around snow pillow and snow course sites in the Sierra Nevada of California. Water Resour. Res. 2010, 46:W03537. 10.1029/2008WR007318.
129. Ritter A., Muñoz-Carpena R. Performance evaluation of hydrological models: statistical significance for reducing subjectivity in goodness-of-fit assessments. J. Hydrol. 2013, 480:33-34. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.12.004.
130. Rutter N., Cline D., Long L. Evaluation of the NOHRSC Snow Model (NSM) in a one-dimensional mode. J. Hydrometeorol. 2008, 9:695-711.
131. Rutter N., Essery R., Pomeroy J., Koren V., et al. Evaluation of forest snow processes models (SnowMIP2). J. Geophys. Res. 2009, 114:1-5. 10.1029/2008JD011063.
132. Schaake J.C., Cong S., Duan Q. The U.S. MOPEX Data Set 2006, vol. 307. IAHS Publication, pp. 9-28.
133. Schaefli B., Gupta H.V. Do Nash values have value?. Hydrol. Process. 2007, 21:2075-2080. 10.1002/hyp.6825.
134. Schmidt, J.A., Anderson, A.J., Paul, J.H., 2007. Spatially-variable, physically-derived flash flood guidance. In: Paper 6B.2, Proceedings of the 21st Conference on Hydrology, 87th Meeting of the AMS, San Antonio, Texas, January 15-18.
135. Seibert J. On the need for benchmarks in hydrological modeling. Hydrol. Process. 2001, 15(6):1063-1064.
136. Seo D.-J. Real-time estimation of rainfall fields using rain gage data under fractional coverage conditions. J. Hydrol. 1998, 208:25-36.
137. Serreze M.C., Clark M.P., Armstrong R.L., McGinnis D.A., Pulwarty R.S. Characteristics of the western United States snowpack from snowpack telemetry (SNOTEL) data. Water Resour. Res. 1999, 35(7):2145-2160.
138. Shamir E., Georgakakos K.P. Distributed snow accumulation and ablation modeling in the American River Basin. Adv. Water Resour. 2006, 29:558-570.
139. Shao Y., Henderson-Sellers A. Modeling soil moisture: a project for intercomparison of land surface parameterization schemes Phase 2(b). J. Geophys. Res. 1996, 101(D23):7227-7250.
140. Simpson J.J., Dettinger M.D., Gehrke F., McIntire T.J., Huffurd G.L. Hydrologic scales, cloud variability, remote sensing, and models: implications for forecasting snowmelt and streamflow. Weather Forecast. 2004, 19(April):251-276.
141. Slater A.G., Schlosser C.A., et al. The representation of snow in land surface schemes: results from PILPS 2(d). J. Hydrometeorol. 2001, 2:7-25.
142. Smith M.B., Laurine D.P., Koren V.I., Reed S.M., Zhang Z. Hydrologic model calibration in the National Weather Service. Calibration of Watershed Models: Water Science and Applications 2003, 133-152. AGU Press. Duan (Ed.).
143. Smith M.B., Seo D.-J., Koren V.I., Reed S., Zhang Z., Duan Q.-Y., Moreda F., Cong S. The distributed model intercomparison project (DMIP): motivation and experiment design. J. Hydrol. 2004, 298(1-4):4-26.
144. Smith, M.B., Koren,V., Reed, S., Zhang, Z., Seo, D.-J., Moreda, F., Cui, Z., 2006. The Distributed Model Intercomparison Project: Phase 2 Science Plan. <>. http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hrl/dmip/2/docs/dmip_2_plan_march10_06_update.pdf.
145. Smith, M., Koren, V., Reed, S., Zhang, Z., Cui, Z., Mizukami, N., Moreda, F., Sheldon, S., 2009. Preliminary results of phase 2 of the distributed model intercomparison project. In: Presentation 4.1, 23rd Conference on Hydrology, 89th Meeting of the AMS, Phoenix, Arizona, January 10-15. <>. https://ams.confex.com/ams/89annual/techprogram/paper_148995.htm.
146. Smith, M., Ding, F., Cui, Z., Koren, V., Mizukami, N., Zhang, Z., Cosgrove, B., Kitzmiller, D., Schaake, J., 2010. Development of gridded QPE datasets for mountainous area distributed hydrologic modeling. In: Presented at the ASCE EWRI Conference, Rhode Island, May 2010.
147. Smith M.B., Koren V., Reed S., Zhang Z., Zhang Yu., Moreda F., Cui Z., Mizukami N., Anderson E.A., Cosgrove B.A. The distributed model intercomparison project - Phase 2: motivation and design of the Oklahoma experiments. J. Hydrol. 2012, 418-419:3-16. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.08.055.
148. Smith M., Koren V., Zhang Z., Zhang Y., Reed S., Cui Z., Moreda F., Anderson E., Cosgrove B., Mizukami N., DMIP 2 Participants Overall results of the DMIP 2 Oklahoma experiments. J. Hydrol. 2012, 418-419:17-48. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.08.056.
149. Timbal B., Henderson-Sellers A. Intercomparisons of land-surface parameterizations coupled to a limited area forecast model. Global Planet. Change 1998, 19:247-260.
150. Todini, E., Ciarapica L., 2002. The TOPKAPI model. In: Singh, V.P., Frevert, D.K. (Eds.), Mathematical Models of Large Watershed Hydrology. Water Resources (chapter 12).
151. Tsintikidis D., Georgakakos K.P., Sperfslage J.A., Smith D.E., Carpenter T.M. Precipitation uncertainty and rain gage network design within the Folsom Lake Watershed. ASCE J. Hydrol. Eng. 2002, 7(2):175-184.
152. Valéry, A., 2010. Modélisation précipitations - débit sous influence nivale. Élaboration d'un module neige et évaluation sur 380 bassins versants. Thèse de Doctorat, Cemagref (Antony), AgroParisTech (Paris), 405pp. <>. http://webgr.irstea.fr/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2010-VALERY-THESE.pdf.
153. Valéry, A., Andréassian, V., Perrin, C., 2009. Inverting the hydrologic cycle: When streamflow measurements help assess altitudinal precipitation gradients in mountain areas. IAHS-AISH Publication 333, pp. 281-286.
154. Vélez J.J., Puricelli M., López-Unzu F., Francés F. Parameter extrapolation to ungaged basins with a hydrological distributed model in a regional framework. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2009, 13(2):229-246.
155. Viney N.R., Bormann H., Breuer L., Bronstert A., Croke B.F.W., Frede H., et al. Assessing the impact of land use change on hydrology by ensemble modeling (LUCHEM) II: Ensemble combinations and predictions. Advances in Water Resources 2009, 32(2):147-158. 10.1016/j.advwatres.2008.05.006.
156. Waichler S.R., Wigmosta M.S. Development of hourly meteorological values from daily data and significance to hydrologic modeling at H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest. J. Hydrometeorol. 2003, 4:251-263.
157. Walter M.T., Brooks E.S., McCool D.K., King L.G., Molnau M., Boll J. Process-based snowmelt modeling: does it require more input data than temperature-index modeling?. J. Hydrol. 2005, 300:65-75. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.05.002.
158. Wang J., Georgakakos K.P. Validation and sensitivities of dynamic precipitation simulation of winter events over the Folsom Lake Watershed: 1964-1999. Mon. Weather Rev. 2005, 133:3-19.
159. Wayand N., Hamlet A., Hughes M., Feld S., Lundquist J. Intercomparison of meteorological forcing data from empirical and mesoscale model sources in the N.F. American River Basin in northern Sierra Nevada, California. J. Hydrometeorol. 2013, 14:677-699. 10.1175/JHM-D-12-0102.1.
160. Westrick K.J., Mass C.J. An evaluation of a high-resolution hydrometeorological modeling system for prediction of a cool-season flood event in a coastal mountainous watershed. J. Hydrometeorol. 2001, 2:161-180.
161. Westrick K.J., Mass C.F., Colle B.A. The limitations of the WSR-88D radar network for quantitative precipitation measurement over the coastal Western United States. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 1999, 80(11):2289-2298.
162. Westrick K.J., Storck Pl., Mass C.J. Description and evaluation of a hydrometeorological forecast system of mountainous watersheds. Weather Forecast. 2002, 17:250-262.
163. White A.B., Gottas D.J., Strem E.T., Ralph F.M., Neiman P.J. An automated brightband height detection algorithm for use with Doppler radar spectral moments. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol. 2002, 19:697.
164. White A.B., Gottas D.J., Henkel A.F., Neiman P.J., Ralph F.M., Gutman S.I. Developing a performance measure for snow-level forecasts. J. Hydrometeorol. 2010, 11:739-753.
165. Wigmosta M.S., Vail L., Lettenmaier D.P. A distributed hydrology-vegetation model for complex terrain. Water Resour. Res. 1994, 30:1665-1679.
166. WMO, 1986a. Intercomparison of Models of Snowmelt Runoff. Operational Hydrology Report No. 23. World Meteorological Organisation, Geneva.
167. WMO, 1986b. Results of an Intercomparison of Models of Snowmelt Runoff, IAHS-AISH Publication 155, pp. 103-112.
168. Wood E., Lettenmaier D.P., Liang X., Lohmann D., Boone A., Chang S., Chen F., Dai Y., Dickinson R.E., Duan Q., Ek M., Susev Y.M., Habets F., Irannejad P., Koster R., Mitchel K.E., Nasonova O.N., Noilhan J., Schaake J., Schlosser A., Shao Y., Shmakin A.B., Verseghy D., Warrach K., Wetzel P., Xue Y., Yang Z.-L., Zeng Q. The project for intercomparison of land surface parameterization schemes (PILPS) Phase 2(c) Red-Arkansas River basin experiment: 1. Experiment description and summary intercomparisons. Global Planet. Change 1998, 19:115-136.
169. Yang D., Goodison B.E., Metcalfe J.R., Golubevy V.S., Bates R., Pangburn T., Hanson C.L. Accuracy of NWS 8″ standard non-recording precipitation gage: results and application of WMO intercomparisons. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol. 1998, 15:54-68.
170. Yang D., Goodison B.E., Ishida S. Adjustment of daily precipitation data at 10 climate stations in Alaska: application of world meteorological organization intercomparison results. Water Resour. Res. 1998, 34(2):241-256.
171. Young C.B., Bradley A.A., Krajewski W.F., Kruger A. Evaluating NEXRAD multi-sensor precipitation estimates for operational hydrologic forecasting. J. Hydrometeorol. 2000, 1:241-254.
172. Zamora R.J., Ralph F.M., Clark E., Schneider T. The NOAA hydrometeorology testbed soil moisture observing networks: design, instrumentation, and preliminary results. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol. 2011, 28:1129-1140. 10.1175/2010JTECHA1465.1.
173. Zhang Y., Zhang Z., Reed S., Koren V. An enhanced and automated approach for deriving a priori SAC-SMA parameters from the Soil Survey Geographic Database. Comput. Geosci. 2011, 37(2):219-231. 10.1016/j.cageo.2010.05.016.
174. Zhang Z., Koren V., Reed S., Smith M., Zhang Y., Moreda F., Cosgrove B.A. SAC-SMA a priori parameter differences and their impact on distributed hydrologic model simulations. J. Hydrol. 2012, 420-421:216-227. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.12.004.