Uncertainty in hydrological signatures

Hydrology and Earth System Sciences

Volumn 19, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 3951-3968

  Westerberg, I K ^a,b   McMillan, H K ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b IVL SWEDISH ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^c NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF WATER AND ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CATCHMENTS; FREQUENCY RESPONSE; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; MONTE CARLO METHODS; RAIN; RUNOFF; WATER MANAGEMENT;

CATCHMENT CLASSIFICATIONS; HIGH FREQUENCY RESPONSE; HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS; INFORMATION CONTENTS; MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS; MONTE CARLO SAMPLING; RAINFALL-RUNOFF PROCESS; SIGNATURE UNCERTAINTY;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

CALIBRATION; CATCHMENT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DATA SET; ECOHYDROLOGY; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; RAINFALL-RUNOFF MODELING; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WATER MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84942626923     PISSN: 10275606     EISSN: 16077938     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5194/hess-19-3951-2015     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Ali, G.; Oswald, C. J.; Spence, C.; Cammeraat, E. L. H.; McGuire, K. J.; Meixner, T.; and Reaney, S. M.: Towards a unified threshold-based hydrological theory: necessary components and recurring challenges, Hydrol. Process.; 27, 313-318, 2013.
2. Archer, D. and Newson, M.: The use of indices of flow variability in assessing the hydrological and instream habitat impacts of upland afforestation and drainage, J. Hydrol.; 268, 244-258, 2002.
3. Bengtsson, L. and Milloti, S.: Extreme storms in Malmo, Sweden, Hydrol. Process.; 24, 3462-3475, 2010.
4. Blazkova, S. and Beven, K. J.: A limits of acceptability approach to model evaluation and uncertainty estimation in flood frequency estimation by continuous simulation: Skalka catchment, Czech Republic, Water Resour. Res.; 45, W00B16, doi:10.1029/2007WR006726, 2009.
5. Blöschl, G.; Sivapalan, M.;Wagener, T.; Viglione, A.; and Savenije, H. H. G. (Eds.): Runoff Prediction in Ungauged Basins: Synthesis Across Processes, Places and Scales, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013.
6. Brown, J. D.: Knowledge, uncertainty and physical geography: towards the development of methodologies for questioning belief, T. I. Brit. Geogr.; 29, 367-381, 2004.
7. Brutsaert, W. and Lopez, J. P.: Basin-scale geohydrologic drought flow features of riparian aquifers in the southern Great Plains, Water Resour. Res.; 34, 233-240, 1998.
8. Casper, M. C.; Grigoryan, G.; Gronz, O.; Gutjahr, O.; Heinemann, G.; Ley, R.; and Rock, A.: Analysis of projected hydrological behavior of catchments based on signature indices, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 16, 409-421, doi:10.5194/hess-16-409-2012, 2012.
9. Ciach, G. J.: Local random errors in tipping-bucket rain gauge measurements, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech.; 20, 752-759, 2003.
10. Clark, M.; McMillan, H.; Collins, D.; Kavetski, D.; and Woods, R.: Hydrological field data from a modellers perspective: Part 2: process-based evaluation of model hypotheses, Hydrol. Process.; 25, 523-543, 2011.
11. Clark, M. P.; Rupp, D. E.;Woods, R. A.; Tromp-van Meerveld, H. J.; Peters, N. E.; and Freer, J. E.: Consistency between hydrological models and field observations: linking processes at the hillslope scale to hydrological responses at the watershed scale, Hydrol. Process.; 23, 311-319, 2009.
12. Clausen, B. and Biggs, B. J. F.: Flow variables for ecological studies in temperate streams: groupings based on covariance, J. Hydrol.; 237, 184-197, 2000.
13. Coxon, G.; Freer, J.; Wagener, T.; Odoni, A.; and Clark, M.: Diagnostic evaluation of multiple hypotheses of hydrological behaviour in a limits-of-acceptability framework for 24 UK catchments, Hydrol. Process.; 28, 6135-6150, doi:10.1002/hyp.10096, 2013.
14. Coxon, G. Freer, J. Westerberg, I. K.; Wagener, T.; Woods, R.; and Smith, P. J.: A novel framework for discharge uncertainty quantification applied to 500 UK gauging stations,Water Resour. Res.; 51, 5531-5546, doi:10.1002/2014WR016532, 2015.
15. Eischeid, J. K.; Baker, C. B.; Karl, T. R.; and Diaz, H. F.: The quality-control of long-term climatological data using objective data-analysis, J. Appl. Meteorol.; 34, 2787-2795, 1995.
16. Euser, T.; Winsemius, H. C.; Hrachowitz, M.; Fenicia, F.; Uhlenbrook, S.; and Savenije, H. H. G.: A framework to assess the realism of model structures using hydrological signatures, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 17, 1893-1912, doi:10.5194/hess-17-1893- 2013, 2013.
17. Graham, C. B.; van Verseveld, W.; Barnard, H. R.; and McDonnell, J. J.: Estimating the deep seepage component of the hillslope and catchment water balance within a measurement uncertainty framework, Hydrol. Process.; 24, 3631-3647, 2010a.
18. Graham, C. B.; Woods, R. A.; and McDonnell, J. J.: Hillslope threshold response to rainfall: (1) A field based forensic approach, J. Hydrol.; 393, 65-76, 2010b.
19. Gupta, H. V. and Nearing, G. S.: Debates - The future of hydrological sciences: A (common) path forward? Using models and data to learn: A systems theoretic perspective on the future of hydrological science,Water Resour. Res.; 50, 5351-5359, doi:10.1002/2013WR015096, 2014.
20. Gupta, H. V.; Wagener, T.; and Liu, Y. Q.: Reconciling theory with observations: elements of a diagnostic approach to model evaluation, Hydrol. Process.; 22, 3802-3813, 2008.
21. Gustard, A.; Bullock, A.; and Dixon, J. M.: Low Flow Estimation in the United Kingdom, Institute of Hydrology,Wallingford, UK, 108, 88 pp.; 1992.
22. Hall, F. R.: Base flow recessions - a review, Water Resour. Res.; 4, 973-983, 1968.
23. Hamilton, A. and Moore, R. D.: Quantifying Uncertainty in Streamflow Records, Can. Water Resour. J.; 37, 3-21, 2012.
24. Harman, C. J.; Sivapalan, M.; and Kumar, P.: Power law catchment-scale recessions arising from heterogeneous linear small-scale dynamics, Water Resour. Res.; 45, W09404, doi:10.1029/2008WR007392, 2009.
25. Harman, C. J.; Troch, P. A.; and Sivapalan, M.: Functional model of water balance variability at the catchment scale: 2. Elasticity of fast and slow runoff components to precipitation change in the continental United States, Water Resour. Res.; 47, W02523, doi:10.1029/2010WR009656, 2011.
26. Hrachowitz, M.; Savenije, H. H. G.; Bloschl, G.; McDonnell, J. J.; Sivapalan, M.; Pomeroy, J. W.; Arheimer, B.; Blume, T.; Clark, M. P.; Ehret, U.; Fenicia, F.; Freer, J. E.; Gelfan, A.; Gupta, H. V.; Hughes, D. A.; Hut, R.W.; Montanari, A.; Pande, S.; Tetzlaff, D.; Troch, P. A.; Uhlenbrook, S.;Wagener, T.;Winsemius, H. C.; Woods, R. A.; Zehe, E.; and Cudennec, C.: A decade of Predictions in Ungauged Basins (PUB) a review, Hydrolog. Sci. J.; 58, 1198-1255, doi:10.1080/02626667.2013.803183, 2013.
27. Hrachowitz, M.; Fovet, O.; Ruiz, L.; Euser, T.; Gharari, S.; Nijzink, R.; Freer, J.; Savenije, H. H. G.; and Gascuel-Odoux, C.: Process consistency in models: the importance of system signatures, expert knowledge, and process complexity,Water Resour. Res.; 50, 7445-7469, 2014.
28. Jowett, I. G. and Duncan, M. J.: Flow variability in New-Zealand rivers and its relationship to in-stream habitat and biota, New Zeal. J. Mar. Fresh.; 24, 305-317, 1990.
29. Juston, J.; Jansson, P.-E.; and Gustafsson, D.: Rating curve uncertainty and change detection in discharge time series: case study with 44-year historic data from the Nyangores River, Kenya, Hydrol. Process.; 28, 2509-2523, 2014.
30. Juston, J. M.; Kauffeldt, A.; Quesada Montano, B.; Seibert, J.; Beven, K. J.; andWesterberg, I. K.: Smiling in the rain: seven reasons to be positive about uncertainty in hydrological modelling, Hydrol. Process.; 27, 1117-1122, 2013.
31. Kapangaziwiri, E.; Hughes, D. A.; and Wagener, T.: Incorporating uncertainty in hydrological predictions for gauged and ungauged basins in southern Africa, Hydrolog. Sci. J.; 57, 1000- 1019, 2012.
32. Kauffeldt, A.; Halldin, S.; Rodhe, A.; Xu, C.-Y.; and Westerberg, I. K.: Disinformative data in large-scale hydrological modelling, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 17, 2845-2857, doi:10.5194/hess-17- 2845-2013, 2013.
33. Kavetski, D. and Fenicia, F.: Elements of a flexible approach for conceptual hydrological modeling: 2. Application and experimental insights, Water Resour. Res.; 47, W11511, doi:10.1029/2011WR010748, 2011.
34. Kennard, M. J.; Mackay, S. J.; Pusey, B. J.; Olden, J. D.; and Marsh, N.: Quantifying uncertainty in estimation of hydrologic metrics for ecohydrological studies, River Res. Appl.; 26, 137-156, 2010.
35. Kirchner, J. W.: Catchments as simple dynamical systems: catchment characterization, rainfall-runoff modeling, and doing hydrology backward, Water Resour. Res.; 45, W02429, doi:10.1029/2008WR006912, 2009.
36. Krueger, T.; Freer, J.; Quinton, J. N.; Macleod, C. J. A.; Bilotta, G. S.; Brazier, R. E.; Butler, P.; and Haygarth, P. M.: Ensemble evaluation of hydrological model hypotheses, Water Resour. Res.; 46, W07516, doi:10.1029/2009WR007845, 2010.
37. Li, H. Y. and Sivapalan, M.: Effect of spatial heterogeneity of runoff generation mechanisms on the scaling behavior of event runoff responses in a natural river basin, Water Resour. Res.; 47, W00H08, doi:10.1029/2010WR009712, 2011.
38. McDonnell, J. J. and Woods, R.: On the need for catchment classification, J. Hydrol.; 299, 2-3, 2004.
39. McMillan, H. and Westerberg, I. K.: Rating curve estimation under epistemic uncertainty, Hydrol. Process.; 29, 1873-1882, 2015.
40. McMillan, H.; Freer, J.; Pappenberger, F.; Krueger, T.; and Clark, M.: Impacts of uncertain flow data on rainfall-runoff model calibration and discharge predictions, Hydrol. Process.; 24, 1270- 1284, 2010.
41. McMillan, H.; Clark, M.; Bowden, W. B.; Duncan, M. J.; and Woods, R.: Hydrological field data from a modellers perspective. Part 1: Diagnostic tests for model structure, Hydrol. Process.; 25, 511-522, 2011.
42. McMillan, H.; Krueger, T.; and Freer, J.: Benchmarking observational uncertainties for hydrology: rainfall, river discharge and water quality, Hydrol. Process.; 26, 4078-4111, 2012.
43. McMillan, H.; Gueguen, M.; Grimon, E.; Woods, R.; Clark, M. P.; and Rupp, D. E.: Spatial variability of hydrological processes and model structure diagnostics in a 50 km2 catchment, Hydrol. Process.; 28, 4896-4913, doi:10.1002/hyp.9988, 2014.
44. Montanari, A. and Toth, E.: Calibration of hydrological models in the spectral domain: an opportunity for scarcely gauged basins?, Water Resour. Res.; 43, W05434, doi:10.1029/2006WR005184, 2007.
45. Moore, R. J.; Jones, D. A.; Cox, D. R.; and Isham, V. S.: Design of the HYREX raingauge network, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 4, 521-530, doi:10.5194/hess-4-521-2000, 2000.
46. Olden, J. D. and Poff, N. L.: Redundancy and the choice of hydrologic indices for characterizing streamflow regimes, River Res. Appl.; 19, 101-121, 2003.
47. Pappenberger, F. and Beven, K. J.: Ignorance is bliss: or seven reasons not to use uncertainty analysis, Water Resour. Res.; 42, W05302 doi:10.1029/2005WR004820, 2006.
48. Pappenberger, F.; Matgen, P.; Beven, K. J.; Henry, J. B.; Pfister, L.; and de Fraipont, P.: Influence of uncertain boundary conditions and model structure on flood inundation predictions, Adv. Water Resour.; 29, 1430-1449, 2006.
49. Pechlivanidis, I. G.; Jackson, B. M.; McMillan, H. K.; and Gupta, H. V.: Using an informational entropy-based metric as a diagnostic of flow duration to drive model parameter identification, Global Nest J.; 14, 325-334, 2012.
50. Penna, D.; Tromp-van Meerveld, H. J.; Gobbi, A.; Borga, M.; and Dalla Fontana, G.: The influence of soil moisture on threshold runoff generation processes in an alpine headwater catchment, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 15, 689-702, doi:10.5194/hess-15-689- 2011, 2011.
51. Pokhrel, P.; Yilmaz, K. K.; and Gupta, H. V.: Multiple-criteria calibration of a distributed watershed model using spatial regularization and response signatures, J. Hydrol.; 418, 49-60, 2012.
52. Refsgaard, J. C. and Knudsen, J.: Operational validation and intercomparison of different types of hydrological models, Water Resour. Res.; 32, 2189-2202, 1996.
53. Rupp, D. E. and Selker, J. S.: Information, artifacts, and noise in dQ=dtQ recession analysis, Adv.Water Resour.; 29, 154-160, 2006.
54. Sawicz, K.; Wagener, T.; Sivapalan, M.; Troch, P. A.; and Carrillo, G.: Catchment classification: empirical analysis of hydrologic similarity based on catchment function in the eastern USA, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 15, 2895-2911, doi:10.5194/hess-15-2895- 2011, 2011.
55. Seibert, J. and McDonnell, J. J.: On the dialog between experimentalist and modeler in catchment hydrology: use of soft data for multicriteria model calibration, Water Resour. Res.; 38, 1241, doi:10.1029/2001WR000978, 2002.
56. Shaw, S. B. and Riha, S. J.: Examining individual recession events instead of a data cloud: using a modified interpretation of dQ=dt Qstreamflow recession in glaciated watersheds to better inform models of low flow, J. Hydrol.; 434, 46-54, 2012.
57. Sieck, L. C.; Burges, S. J.; and Steiner, M.: Challenges in obtaining reliable measurements of point rainfall, Water Resour. Res.; 43, W01420 doi:10.1029/2005wr004519, 2007.
58. Sivakumar, B.; Singh, V.; Berndtsson, R.; and Khan, S.: Catchment classification framework in hydrology: challenges and directions, J. Hydrol. Eng.; 20, A4014002, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943- 5584.0000837, 2013.
59. Smith, P.; Beven, K. J.; and Tawn, J. A..: Informal likelihood measures in model assessment: theoretic development and investigation, Adv. Water Resour.; 31, 1087-1100, 2008.
60. Staudinger, M.; Stahl, K.; Seibert, J.; Clark, M. P.; and Tallaksen, L. M.: Comparison of hydrological model structures based on recession and low flow simulations, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 15, 3447-3459, doi:10.5194/hess-15-3447-2011, 2011.
61. Stoelzle, M.; Stahl, K.; and Weiler, M.: Are streamflow recession characteristics really characteristic?, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 17, 817-828, doi:10.5194/hess-17-817-2013, 2013.
62. Sugawara, M.: Automatic calibration of the tank model, Hydrol. Sci. Bull.; 24, 375-388, 1979.
63. Tallaksen, L. M.: A review of baseflow recession analysis, J. Hydrol.; 165, 349-370, 1995.
64. Tromp-van Meerveld, H. J. and McDonnell, J. J.: Threshold relations in subsurface stormflow: 1. A 147-storm analysis of the Panola hillslope, Water Resour. Res.; 42, W02410, doi:10.1029/2004WR003778, 2006a.
65. Tromp-van Meerveld, H. J. and McDonnell, J. J.: Threshold relations in subsurface stormflow: 2. The fill and spill hypothesis, Water Resour. Res.; 42, W02411, doi:10.1029/2004WR003800, 2006b.
66. Villarini, G. and Krajewski, W. F.: Empirically-based modeling of spatial sampling uncertainties associated with rainfall measurements by rain gauges, Adv.Water Resour.; 31, 1015-1023, 2008.
67. Viney, N. R. and Bates, B. C.: It never rains on Sunday: the prevalence and implications of untagged multi-day rainfall accumulations in the Australian high quality data set, Int. J. Climatol.; 24, 1171-1192, 2004.
68. Wagener, T.; Sivapalan, M.; Troch, P. A.; andWoods, R.: Catchment classification and hydrologic similarity, Geogr. Comp.; 1, 901-931, 2007.
69. Westerberg, I. K.; Walther, A.; Guerrero, J.-L.; Coello, Z.; Halldin, S.; Xu, C. Y.; Chen, D.; and Lundin, L.-C.: Precipitation data in a mountainous catchment in Honduras: quality assessment and spatiotemporal characteristics, Theor. Appl. Climatol.; 101, 381- 396, 2010.
70. Westerberg, I. K.; Guerrero, J.-L.; Younger, P. M.; Beven, K. J.; Seibert, J.; Halldin, S.; Freer, J. E.; and Xu, C.-Y.: Calibration of hydrological models using flow-duration curves, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 15, 2205-2227, doi:10.5194/hess-15-2205- 2011, 2011.
71. Westerberg, I. K.; Gong, L.; Beven, K. J.; Seibert, J.; Semedo, A.; Xu, C.-Y.; and Halldin, S.: Regional water balance modelling using flow-duration curves with observational uncertainties, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 18, 2993-3013, doi:10.5194/hess-18-2993- 2014, 2014.
72. Winsemius, H. C.; Schaefli, B.; Montanari, A.; and Savenije, H. H. G.: On the calibration of hydrological models in ungauged basins: a framework for integrating hard and soft hydrological information, Water Resour. Res.; 45, W12422, doi:10.1029/2009wr007706 2009.
73. WMO: Guide to Hydrological Practices, vol I.: Hydrology - from Measurement to Hydrological Information, World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, 168, 2008.
74. Wood, S. J.; Jones, D. A.; and Moore, R. J.: Accuracy of rainfall measurement for scales of hydrological interest, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.; 4, 531-543, doi:10.5194/hess-4-531-2000, 2000.
75. Woods, R. A.; Grayson, R. B.; Western, A. W.; Duncan, M. J.; Wilson, D. J.; Young, R. I.; Ibbitt, R. P.; Henderson, R. D.; and McMahon, T. A.: Experimental design and initial results from the Mahurangi River variability experiment: MARVEX, in: Observations and Modelling of Land Surface Hydrological Processes, edited by: Lakshmi, V.; Albertson, J. D.; and Schaake, J.; Water Resources Monographs, American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C.; 201-213, 2001.
76. Yadav, M.; Wagener, T.; and Gupta, H.: Regionalization of constraints on expected watershed response behavior for improved predictions in ungauged basins, Adv. Water Resour.; 30, 1756-1774, 2007.
77. Zhang, Y.; Vaze, J.; Chiew, F. H. S.; Teng, J.; and Li, M.: Predicting hydrological signatures in ungauged catchments using spatial interpolation, index model, and rainfall-runoff modelling, J. Hydrol.; 517, 936-948, 2014.