Impacts of hydrological model calibration on projected hydrological changes under climate change—a multi-model assessment in three large river basins

dc.bibliographicCitation.firstPage1143eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.issue3eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.journalTitleClimatic changeeng
dc.bibliographicCitation.lastPage1164eng
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume163eng
dc.contributor.authorHuang, Shaochun
dc.contributor.authorShah, Harsh
dc.contributor.authorNaz, Bibi S.
dc.contributor.authorShrestha, Narayan
dc.contributor.authorMishra, Vimal
dc.contributor.authorDaggupati, Prasad
dc.contributor.authorGhimire, Uttam
dc.contributor.authorVetter, Tobias
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-21T08:39:06Z
dc.date.available2021-09-21T08:39:06Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.description.abstractThis study aimed to investigate the influence of hydrological model calibration/validation on discharge projections for three large river basins (the Rhine, Upper Mississippi and Upper Yellow). Three hydrological models (HMs), which have been firstly calibrated against the monthly discharge at the outlet of each basin (simple calibration), were re-calibrated against the daily discharge at the outlet and intermediate gauges under contrast climate conditions simultaneously (enhanced calibration). In addition, the models were validated in terms of hydrological indicators of interest (median, low and high flows) as well as actual evapotranspiration in the historical period. The models calibrated using both calibration methods were then driven by the same bias corrected climate projections from five global circulation models (GCMs) under four Representative Concentration Pathway scenarios (RCPs). The hydrological changes of the indicators were represented by the ensemble median, ensemble mean and ensemble weighted means of all combinations of HMs and GCMs under each RCP. The results showed moderate (5–10%) to strong influence (> 10%) of the calibration methods on the ensemble medians/means for the Mississippi, minor to moderate (up to 10%) influence for the Yellow and minor (< 5%) influence for the Rhine. In addition, the enhanced calibration/validation method reduced the shares of uncertainty related to HMs for three indicators in all basins when the strict weighting method was used. It also showed that the successful enhanced calibration had the potential to reduce the uncertainty of hydrological projections, especially when the HM uncertainty was significant after the simple calibration. © 2020, The Author(s).eng
dc.description.versionpublishedVersioneng
dc.identifier.urihttps://oa.tib.eu/renate/handle/123456789/6869
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.34657/5916
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.publisherDordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.Veng
dc.relation.doihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02872-6
dc.relation.essn1573-1480
dc.relation.issn0165-0009
dc.rights.licenseCC BY 4.0 Unportedeng
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/eng
dc.subject.ddc550eng
dc.subject.otherANOVA analysiseng
dc.subject.otherRunoff quantileeng
dc.subject.otherSWATeng
dc.subject.otherSWIMeng
dc.subject.otherVICeng
dc.titleImpacts of hydrological model calibration on projected hydrological changes under climate change—a multi-model assessment in three large river basinseng
dc.typeArticleeng
dc.typeTexteng
tib.accessRightsopenAccesseng
wgl.contributorPIKeng
wgl.subjectGeowissenschafteneng
wgl.typeZeitschriftenartikeleng
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Impacts of hydrological model calibration on projected hydrological changes under climate change—a multi-model assessment in three large river basins.pdf
Size:
1.16 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: