Application of USDM statistics in NLDAS‐2: Optimal blended NLDAS drought index over the continental United States

This study performs three experiments to calibrate the drought area percentages in the continental United States (CONUS), six U.S. Drought Monitor (USDM) regions, and 48 states downloaded from the USDM archive website. The corresponding three experiments are named CONUS, Region, and State, respectively. The data sets used in these experiments are from the North American Land Data Assimilation System Phase 2 (NLDAS-2). The main purpose is to develop an automated USDM-based approach to objectively generate and reconstruct USDM-style drought maps using NLDAS-2 data by mimicking 10 year (2000–2009) USDM statistics. The results show that State and Region have larger correlation coefficients and smaller root-mean-square error (RMSE) and bias than CONUS when compared to the drought area percentages derived from the USDM, indicating that State and Region perform better than CONUS. In general, State marginally outperforms Region in terms of RMSE, bias, and correlation. Analysis of normalized optimal weight coefficients shows that soil moisture percentiles (top 1 m and total column) play the dominant role in most of the 48 states. The optimal blended NLDAS drought index (OBNDI) has higher simulation skills (correlation coefficient and Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency) in the South, Southeast, High Plains, and Midwest regions when compared to those in the West and Northeast. The highest simulation skills appear in TX and OK. By using optimal equations, we can reconstruct the long-term drought area percentages and OBNDI over the continental United States for the entire period of the NLDAS-2 data sets (January 1979 to present).

[1]  Eric F. Wood,et al.  Uncertainties, Correlations, and Optimal Blends of Drought Indices from the NLDAS Multiple Land Surface Model Ensemble , 2014 .

[2]  C. Daly,et al.  A Statistical-Topographic Model for Mapping Climatological Precipitation over Mountainous Terrain , 1994 .

[3]  R. Heim.  A Review of Twentieth-Century Drought Indices Used in the United States , 2002 .

[4]  J. Nash,et al.  River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I — A discussion of principles☆ , 1970 .

[5]  Mrinal K. Sen,et al.  Bayesian inference, Gibbs' sampler and uncertainty estimation in geophysical inversion , 1996 .

[6]  Melissa Widhalm,et al.  The Lincoln Declaration on Drought Indices: Universal Meteorological Drought Index Recommended , 2011 .

[7]  L. Ingber.  Very fast simulated re-annealing , 1989 .

[8]  R. Houborg,et al.  Drought indicators based on model‐assimilated Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) terrestrial water storage observations , 2012 .

[9]  J. D. Tarpley,et al.  The multi‐institution North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS): Utilizing multiple GCIP products and partners in a continental distributed hydrological modeling system , 2004 .

[10]  Eric F. Wood,et al.  An efficient calibration method for continental‐scale land surface modeling , 2008 .

[11]  K. Mo,et al.  Continental-scale water and energy flux analysis and validation for the North American Land Data Assimilation System project phase 2 (NLDAS-2): 1. Intercomparison and application of model products , 2012 .

[12]  Dennis P. Lettenmaier,et al.  Multimodel Ensemble Reconstruction of Drought over the Continental United States , 2009 .

[13]  Martha C. Anderson,et al.  An Intercomparison of Drought Indicators Based on Thermal Remote Sensing and NLDAS-2 Simulations with U.S. Drought Monitor Classifications , 2013 .

[14]  T. Tadesse,et al.  The Vegetation Drought Response Index (VegDRI): A New Integrated Approach for Monitoring Drought Stress in Vegetation , 2008 .

[15]  T. Karl.  The Sensitivity of the Palmer Drought Severity Index and Palmer's Z-Index to their Calibration Coefficients Including Potential Evapotranspiration , 1986 .

[16]  K. Mo,et al.  Model-Based Drought Indices over the United States , 2008 .

[17]  D. Lettenmaier,et al.  Twentieth-Century Drought in the Conterminous United States , 2005 .

[18]  M. Ek,et al.  Evaluation of multi-model simulated soil moisture in NLDAS-2 , 2014 .

[19]  Mrinal K. Sen,et al.  Multidataset Study of Optimal Parameter and Uncertainty Estimation of a Land Surface Model with Bayesian Stochastic Inversion and Multicriteria Method , 2004 .

[20]  Martha C. Anderson,et al.  Evaluation of Drought Indices Based on Thermal Remote Sensing of Evapotranspiration over the Continental United States , 2011 .

[21]  Dennis P. Lettenmaier,et al.  Uncertainties in North American Land Data Assimilation Systems over the Contiguous United States , 2012 .

[22]  S. Vicente‐Serrano,et al.  A Multiscalar Drought Index Sensitive to Global Warming: The Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index , 2009 .

[23]  S. Shukla,et al.  Use of a standardized runoff index for characterizing hydrologic drought , 2008 .

[24]  K. Mo,et al.  The modified Palmer drought severity index based on the NCEP North American regional reanalysis , 2006 .

[25]  M. Palecki,et al.  THE DROUGHT MONITOR , 2002 .

[26]  Youlong Xia,et al.  Improvement of the Noah land surface model for warm season processes: evaluation of water and energy flux simulation , 2013 .

[27]  M. Ek,et al.  Continental‐scale water and energy flux analysis and validation for North American Land Data Assimilation System project phase 2 (NLDAS‐2): 2. Validation of model‐simulated streamflow , 2012 .

[28]  N. Metropolis,et al.  Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines , 1953, Resonance.

[29]  Dennis P. Lettenmaier,et al.  Noah LSM Snow Model Diagnostics and Enhancements , 2010 .