Smart low flow signature metrics for an improved overall performance evaluation of hydrological models

Journal of Hydrology

Volumn 510, Issue , 2014, Pages 447-458

  Pfannerstill, Matthias ^a   Guse, Björn ^a   Fohrer, Nicola ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KIEL   (Germany)

Author keywords

Catchment hydrology; Flow duration curve; Low flow; Model evaluation; Multi metric framework; Signature measure

Indexed keywords

CATCHMENT HYDROLOGY; FLOW DURATION CURVE; LOW FLOW; MODEL EVALUATION; MULTI-METRIC FRAMEWORK; SIGNATURE MEASURE;

CALIBRATION; MEAN SQUARE ERROR;

HYDROLOGY;

CALIBRATION; CATCHMENT; HYDROGRAPHY; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84893006176     PISSN: 00221694     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.12.044     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Arnold J.G., Srinivasan R., Muttiah R.S., Williams J.R. Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment. Part I: Model development. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 1998, 34(1):73-89. 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x.
2. Bärlund I., Kirkkala T., Malve O., Kämäri J. Assessing SWAT model performance in the evaluation of management actions for the implementation of the water framework directive in a finnish catchment. Environ. Modell. Software 2007, 22(5):719-724. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2005.12.030.
3. Bekele E.G., Nicklow J.W. Multi-objective automatic calibration of SWAT using NSGA-II. J. Hydrol. 2007, 341(3):165-176. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.05.014.
4. BGR, 1999. Bundesanstalt fuer Geowisschenschaften und Rohstoffe - Bodenuebersichtskarte im Maßstab 1:200.000. Verbreitung der Bodengesellschaften.
5. Boyle D.P., Gupta H.V., Sorooshian S. Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: combining the strengths of manual and automatic methods. Water Resour. Res. 2000, 36(12):3663-3674. 10.1029/2000WR900207.
6. Carrillo G., Troch P., Sivapalan M., Wagener T., Harman C., Sawicz K. Catchment classification: hydrological analysis of catchment behavior through process-based modeling along a climate gradient. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2011, 15:3411-3430. 10.5194/hess-15-3411-2011.
7. Cheng L., Yaeger M., Viglione A., Coopersmith E., Ye S., Sivapalan M. Exploring the physical controls of regional patterns of flow duration curves-Part 1: Insights from statistical analyses. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2012, 16:4435-4446. 10.5194/hess-16-4435-2012.
8. Cibin R., Sudheer K., Chaubey I. Sensitivity and identifiability of stream flow generation parameters of the SWAT model. Hydrol. Process. 2010, 24(9):1133-1148. 10.1002/hyp.7568.
9. Dawson C.W., Abrahart R.J., See L.M. HydroTest: a web-based toolbox of evaluation metrics for the standardised assessment of hydrological forecasts. Environ. Model. Software 2007, 22:1034-1052. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2006.06.008.
10. De Vos N., Rientjes T., Gupta H. Diagnostic evaluation of conceptual rainfall-runoff models using temporal clustering. Hydrol. Process. 2010, 24(20):2840-2850. 10.1002/hyp.7698.
11. Dunn S.M. Imposing constraints on parameter values of a conceptual hydrological model using baseflow response. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 1999, 3(2):271-284.
12. DWD, 2012. Weather and climate data from the German Weather Service of the station Flensburg (1961-1990), Online climate data.
13. Eckhardt K. A comparison of baseflow indices, which were calculated with seven different baseflow separation methods. J. Hydrol. 2008, 352(1):168-173. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.01.005.
14. Fohrer N., Schmalz B. Das UNESCO Ökohydrologie-Referenzprojekt Kielstau-Einzugsgebiet - nachhaltiges Wasserressourcenmanagement und Ausbildung im ländlichen Raum. Hydrol. Wasserbewirt./Hydrol. Water Resour. Manage. - Germany 2012, 56(4):160-168.
15. Fohrer N., Schmalz B., Tavares F., Golon J. Modelling the landscape water balance of mesoscale lowland catchments considering agricultural drainage systems. Hydrol. Wasserbewirt./Hydrol. Water Resour. Manage. - Germany 2007, 51(4):164-169.
16. Fohrer N., Dietrich A., Kolychalow O., Ulrich U. Assessment of the environmental fate of the herbicides flufenacet and metazachlor with the SWAT model. J. Environ. Qual. 2013, 42:1-11. 10.2134/jeq2011.0382.
17. 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.
18. Gupta H.V., Sorooshian S., Yapo P.O. Status of automatic calibration for hydrologic models: comparison with multilevel expert calibration. J. Hydrol. Eng. 1999, 4(2):135-143. 10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(1999)4:2(135).
19. Gupta H.V., Wagener T., Liu Y. Reconciling theory with observations: elements of a diagnostic approach to model evaluation. Hydrol. Process. 2008, 22(18):3802-3813. 10.1002/hyp.6989.
20. Guse B., Reusser D.E., Fohrer N. How to improve the representation of hydrological processes in swat for a lowland catchment - temporal analysis of parameter sensitivity and model performance. Hydrol. Process. 2014, 28:2651-2670. 10.1002/hyp.9777.
21. Gustard, A., Demuth, S., 2009. Manual on low-flow estimation and prediction, operational hydrology report no. 50, WMO-no. 1029.
22. Gustard, A., Bullock, A., Dixon, J., 1992. Low flow estimation in the United Kingdom, Institute of Hydrology, IH Report 108.
23. Herbst M., Casper M. Towards model evaluation and identification using self-organizing maps. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2008, 12(2):657-667. 10.5194/hess-12-657-2008.
24. Herman J., Reed P., Wagener T. Time-varying sensitivity analysis clarifies the effects of watershed model formulation on model behavior. Water Resour. Res. 2013, 49(3):1400-1414. 10.1002/wrcr.20124.
25. Hunter N.M., Bates P.D., Horritt M.S., Wilson M.D. Simple spatially-distributed models for predicting flood inundation: a review. Geomorphology 2007, 90(3):208-225. 10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.10.021.
26. Kiesel J., Fohrer N., Schmalz B., White M. Incorporating landscape depressions and tile drainages of a northern german lowland catchment into a semi-distributed model. Hydrol. Process. 2010, 24(11):1472-1486. 10.1002/hyp.7607.
27. Koch S., Bauwe A., Lennartz B. Application of the SWAT model for a tile-drained lowland catchment in north-eastern Germany on subbasin scale. Water Resour. Manage. 2013, 27(3):791-805. 10.1007/s11269-012-0215-x.
28. 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.
29. Laaha G., Blöschl G. Seasonality indices for regionalizing low flows. Hydrol. Process. 2006, 20(18):3851-3878. 10.1002/hyp.6161.
30. Laaha G., Blöschl G. A national low flow estimation procedure for Austria. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2007, 52(4):625-644. 10.1623/hysj.52.4.625.
31. Legates D.R., McCabe G.J. Evaluating the use of goodness-of-fit measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation. Water Resour. Res. 1999, 35:233-241. 10.1029/1998WR900018.
32. LKN, 2013. Messstelle Soltfeld: Wasserstand und Abfluss, Landesbetrieb fuer Kuestenschutz, Nationalpark und Meeresschutz Schleswig-Holstein; Hydrologie, Mess- und Beobachtungsdienst.
33. Lombardi L., Toth E., Castellarin A., Montanari A., Brath A. Calibration of a rainfall-runoff model at regional scale by optimising river discharge statistics: performance analysis for the average/low flow regime. Phys. Chem. Earth Parts, A/B/C 2012, 42:77-84. 10.1016/j.pce.2011.05.013.
34. LVermA, 1995. Landesvermessungsamt Schleswig-Holstein Digitales Geländemodell fuer SchleswigHolstein. Quelle: TK25. Gitterweite 25m×25m und TK50 Gitterweite 50m×50m sowie ATKIS-DGM2-1m×1m Gitterweite und DGM 5m×5m Gitterweite, abgeleitet aus LiDAR-Daten.
35. Madsen H. Automatic calibration of a conceptual rainfall-runoff model using multiple objectives. J. Hydrol. 2000, 235(3):276-288. 10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00279-1.
36. Madsen H., Wilson G., Ammentorp H.C. Comparison of different automated strategies for calibration of rainfall-runoff models. J. Hydrol. 2002, 261(1):48-59. 10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00619-9.
37. Martinez G.F., Gupta H.V. Hydrologic consistency as a basis for assessing complexity of monthly water balance models for the continental United States. Water Resour. Res. 2011, 47(12). 10.1029/2011WR011229.
38. Moriasi D.N., Arnold J.G., Liew M.W.V., Bingner R.L., Harmel R.D., Veith T.L. Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Trans. ASABE 2007, 50:885-900.
39. Nash J.E., Sutcliffe J.V. River flow forecasting through conceptual models: Part 1. A discussion of principles. J. Hydrol. 1970, 10:282-290. 10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6.
40. Neitsch, S.L., Arnold, J.G., Kiniry, J.R., Williams, J.R., 2011. SWAT theoretical documentation version 2009, Grassland, Soil and Water Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service. Blackland Research Center, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station.
41. Orlowsky B., Gerstengarbe F.-W., Werner P. A resampling scheme for regional climate simulations and its performance compared to a dynamical RCM. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2008, 92(3):209-223. 10.1007/s00704-007-0352-y.
42. Pfannerstill, M., Guse, B., Fohrer, N., 2013. A multi-storage groundwater concept for the SWAT model to emphasize nonlinear groundwater dynamics in lowland catchments, Hydrol. Process. (, in press). doi:10.1002/hyp.10062.
43. Pokhrel P., Yilmaz K., Gupta H. Multiple-criteria calibration of a distributed watershed model using spatial regularization and response signatures. J. Hydrol. 2012, 418-419:49-60. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.12.004.
44. R Core Team, 2013. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R foundation for statistical computing.
45. Santhi C., Arnold J.G., Williams J.R., Dugas W.A., Srinivasan R., Hauck L.M. Validation of the SWAT model on a large riwer basin with point and nonpoint sources. JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 2001, 37(5):1169-1188. 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2001.tb03630.x.
46. Sawicz K., Wagener T., Sivapalan M., Troch P., Carrillo G. Catchment classification: empirical analysis of hydrologic similarity based on catchment function in the eastern USA. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2011, 15:2895-2911. 10.5194/hess-15-2895-2011.
47. Schmalz B., Fohrer N. Comparing model sensitivities of different landscapes using the ecohydrological SWAT model. Adv. Geosci. 2009, 21:91-98. 10.5194/adgeo-21-91-2009.
48. Schmalz B., Tavares F., Fohrer N. Modelling hydrological processes in mesoscale lowland river basins with SWAT-capabilities and challenges. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2008, 53:989-1000. 10.1623/hysj.53.5.989.
49. Smakhtin V. Low flow hydrology: a review. J. Hydrol. 2001, 240(3):147-186. 10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00340-1.
50. Soetaert K., Petzoldt T., et al. Inverse modelling, sensitivity and Monte Carlo analysis in R using package FME. J. Stat. Softw. 2010, 33(3):1-28. doi:10.1.1.160.5179.
51. Tallaksen L.M., Madsen H., Clausen B. On the definition and modelling of streamflow drought duration and deficit volume. Hydrol. Sci. J. 1997, 42(1):15-33. 10.1080/02626669709492003.
52. Tattari S., Koskiaho J., Barlund I., Jaakkola E. Testing a river basin model with sensitivity analysis and autocalibration for an agricultural catchment in SW Finland. Agric. Food Sci. 2009, 18(3-4):3-4.
53. Thielen J., Bartholmes J., Ramos M., De Roo A. The european flood alert system - Part I: Concept and development. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2009, 13(2):125. 10.5194/hess-13-125-2009.
54. van Griensven A., Meixner T., Grunwald S., Bishop T., Diluzio M., Srinivasan R. A global sensitivity analysis tool for the parameters of multi-variable catchment models. J. Hydrol. 2006, 324(1):10-23. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.09.008.
55. van Werkhoven K., Wagener T., Reed P., Tang Y. Sensitivity-guided reduction of parametric dimensionality for multi-objective calibration of watershed models. Adv. Water Resour. 2009, 32(8):1154-1169. 10.1016/j.advwatres.2009.03.002.
56. Vogel R.M., Fennessey N.M. Flow-duration curves. I: New interpretation and confidence intervals. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage. 1994, 120(4):485-504. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(1994)120:4(485).
57. Wagener T., Gupta H.V. Model identification for hydrological forecasting under uncertainty. Stochast. Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 2005, 19(6):378-387. 10.1007/s00477-005-0006-5.
58. Wagener T., Boyle D.P., Lees M.J., Wheater H.S., Gupta H.V., Sorooshian S., et al. A framework for development and application of hydrological models. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2001, 5(1):13-26. 10.5194/hess-5-13-2001.
59. White K.L., Chaubey I. Sensitivity analysis, calibration, and validations for a multisite and multivariable SWAT model. JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 2005, 41(5):1077-1089. 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2005.tb03786.x.
60. Winchell, M., Srinivasan, R., DiLuzio, M., Arnold, J.G., 2010. ArcSWAT interface for SWAT2009, users guide, Blackland Research and Extension Center, pp. 1-495.
61. Wu K., Johnston C.A. Hydrologic response to climatic variability in a great lakes watershed: a case study with the SWAT model. J. Hydrol. 2007, 337(1):187-199. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.01.030.
62. Yadav M., Wagener T., Gupta H. Regionalization of constraints on expected watershed response behavior for improved predictions in ungauged basins. Adv. Water Resour. 2007, 30(8):1756-1774. 10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.01.005.
63. Yilmaz K.K., Gupta H.V., Wagener T. A process-based diagnostic approach to model evaluation: application to the NWS distributed hydrologic model. Water Resour. Res 2008, 44(9). W09,417. 10.1029/2007WR006716.
64. Yokoo Y., Sivapalan M. Towards reconstruction of the flow duration curve: development of a conceptual framework with a physical basis. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2011, 15(9):2805-2819. 10.5194/hess-15-2805-2011.
65. Zambrano-Bigiarini, M., 2012. HydroTSM: time series management, analysis and interpolation for hydrological modelling, R package version 0.3-3.
66. Zhang H., Huang G.H., Wang D., Zhang X. Multi-period calibration of a semi-distributed hydrological model based on hydroclimatic clustering. Adv. Water Resour. 2011, 34(10):1292-1303. 10.1016/j.advwatres.2011.06.005.
67. Zhang C., Chu J., Fu G. Sobol's sensitivity analysis for a distributed hydrological model of Yichun river basin, China. J. Hydrol. 2012, 480:58-68. 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.12.005.