An appraisal of the performance of data-infilling methods for application to daily mean river flow records in the UK

River flow records are fundamental for the sustainable management of water resources and even very short gaps can severely compromise their utility. Suitably-flagged flow estimates, derived via judicious infilling, are potentially highly beneficial to data users. The UK National River Flow Archive provides stewardship of, and access to, UK river flow records. While many datasets held on the archive are complete, gaps remain across a wide range of flow records. A comprehensive assessment of existing techniques for infilling these gaps is currently lacking. This paper therefore assesses 15 simple infilling techniques (including regression, scaling and equipercentile approaches), each relying upon data transfer from hydrologically-similar donor stations, to generate estimates of flow at 26 representative gauging stations. Results reveal the overall superiority of equipercentile and multiple regression techniques compared to the poorer capability of catchment area scaling. Donor station choice has a strong influence on technique performance. Modifying datasets to improve homogeneity, by seasonally grouping flows or excluding certain periods, offers improved performance. These findings provide a foundation upon which guidance on infilling river flow records can be based in future, allowing hydrometric practitioners and data end-users alike to adopt a consistent and auditable approach towards infilling.

[1]  Hyosang Lee,et al.  Ensemble predictions of runoff in ungauged catchments , 2005 .

[2]  D. Hannah,et al.  Large‐scale river flow archives: importance, current status and future needs , 2011 .

[3]  Harry Dixon.  Managing national hydrometric data: from data to information , 2010 .

[4]  G. Blöschl,et al.  Flood frequency regionalisation—spatial proximity vs. catchment attributes , 2005 .

[5]  V. Smakhtin,et al.  Continuous daily hydrograph simulation using duration curves of a precipitation index , 2000 .

[6]  R. Woods,et al.  Catchment Classification and Hydrologic Similarity , 2006, Geography Compass.

[7]  J. R. Wallis,et al.  A daily hydroclimatological data set for the continental United States , 1991 .

[8]  Slobodan P. Simonovic,et al.  Group-based estimation of missing hydrological data: II. Application to streamflows , 2000 .

[9]  R. Hirsch.  A Comparison of Four Streamflow Record Extension Techniques , 1982 .

[10]  P. Gyau-Boakye,et al.  Filling gaps in runoff time series in West Africa , 1994 .

[11]  K. Beven.  Rainfall-Runoff Modelling: The Primer , 2012 .

[12]  Demetris Koutsoyiannis.  The Hurst phenomenon and fractional Gaussian noise made easy , 2002 .

[13]  Robert M. Hirsch,et al.  An evaluation of some record reconstruction techniques , 1979 .

[14]  Mark Robinson,et al.  The long-term water balance (1972-2004) of upland forestry and grassland at Plynlimon, mid-Wales , 2007 .

[15]  A. Gustard,et al.  Low Flow Estimation in the United Kingdom , 1992 .

[16]  N. C. Van de Giesen,et al.  Using a spatio-temporal dynamic state-space model with the EM algorithm to patch gaps in daily riverflow series , 2005 .

[17]  D. Legates,et al.  Evaluating the use of “goodness‐of‐fit” Measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation , 1999 .

[18]  K. A. Bekiashev,et al.  World Meteorological Organization (WMO) , 1981 .

[19]  T. Marsh,et al.  Capitalising on river flow data to meet changing national needs — a UK perspective , 2002 .

[20]  Jamie Hannaford,et al.  High‐flow and flood trends in a network of undisturbed catchments in the UK , 2008 .

[21]  D Stephenson,et al.  Infilling streamflow data using feed-forward back-propagation (BP) artificial neural networks: Application of standard BP and pseudo Mac Laurin power series BP techniques , 2007 .

[22]  R. McCuen,et al.  Evaluation of the Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency Index , 2006 .

[23]  W. C. Lennox,et al.  Groups and neural networks based streamflow data infilling procedures , 2001 .

[24]  Jeffrey G. Arnold,et al.  Model Evaluation Guidelines for Systematic Quantification of Accuracy in Watershed Simulations , 2007 .

[25]  P. Krause,et al.  COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT EFFICIENCY CRITERIA FOR HYDROLOGICAL MODEL ASSESSMENT , 2005 .

[26]  Keith Beven,et al.  Uniqueness of place and process representations in hydrological modelling , 2000 .