The components of a 'SVAT' scheme and their effects on a GCM's hydrological cycle

Abstract ‘Bucket’-type land surface models are being replaced in some general circulation model (GCM) climate studies by ‘SVAT’ (Surface Vegetation-Atmosphere Transfer) models, which feature and explicit treatment of vegetation control over the surface energy balance. The evaporation calculations of a typical SVAT model differ from those of a bucket model in at least four fundamental ways: (a) the SVAT model typically allows a greater variety of environmental stresses to limit evapotranspiration; (b) it generally includes a canopy interception reservoir; (c) the control of the land surface over evaporation in a SVAT model is influenced by the atmosphere; and (d) the land surface control in a SVAT model varies on short time scales. Global fields and grid square diurnal cycles illustrate the hydrological cycle produced in a 20-year simulation with an atmospheric GCM coupled to a SVAT model. A sensitivity analysis then examines the relative importance of the SVAT/bucket differences in terms of their effects on the simulated hydrological cycle. The interception reservoir exerts more control over global evaporation than does either the vapor pressure deficit stress or the temperature stress. The effect of the temperature stress is, in fact, insignificant. The time variability of land surface control over the surface energy balance in a SVAT model significantly increases moisture convergence over land.

[1]  P. S. Eagleson,et al.  Land Surface Hydrology Parameterization for Atmospheric General Circulation models Including Subgrid Scale Spatial Variability , 1989 .

[2]  E. Matthews,et al.  Atlas of Archived Vegetation, Land-use and Seasonal Albedo Data Sets , 1985 .

[3]  Ann Henderson-Sellers,et al.  Biosphere-atmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS) for the NCAR Community Climate Model , 1986 .

[4]  A. Baumgartner.  The world water balance , 1975 .

[5]  Syukuro Manabe,et al.  The Influence of Soil Wetness on Near-Surface Atmospheric Variability , 1989 .

[6]  Y. Mintz,et al.  The sensitivity of numerically simulated climates to land-surface boundary conditions , 1982 .

[7]  Michel M. Verstraete,et al.  The representation of continental surface processes in atmospheric models , 1990 .

[8]  W. James Shuttleworth,et al.  Calibrating the Simple Biosphere Model for Amazonian Tropical Forest Using Field and Remote Sensing Data. Part I: Average Calibration with Field Data , 1989 .

[9]  Glen E. Liston,et al.  Design of a global soil moisture initialization procedure for the simple biosphere model , 1993 .

[10]  Randal D. Koster,et al.  A comparative analysis of two land surface heterogeneity representations , 1992 .

[11]  C. W. Thornthwaite.  An approach toward a rational classification of climate. , 1948 .

[12]  P. Jarvis.  The Interpretation of the Variations in Leaf Water Potential and Stomatal Conductance Found in Canopies in the Field , 1976 .

[13]  S. Moorthi,et al.  Relaxed Arakawa-Schubert - A parameterization of moist convection for general circulation models , 1992 .

[14]  P. Milly.  Potential evaporation and soil moisture in general circulation models , 1992 .

[15]  S. Manabe.  CLIMATE AND THE OCEAN CIRCULATION1 , 1969 .

[16]  A. Dalcher,et al.  A Simple Biosphere Model (SIB) for Use within General Circulation Models , 1986 .

[17]  Roger A. Pielke,et al.  A parameterization of heterogeneous land surfaces for atmospheric numerical models and its impact on regional meteorology , 1989 .

[18]  S. Schubert,et al.  Monthly means of selected climate variables for 1985 - 1989 , 1992 .

[19]  Eric F. Wood,et al.  Evapotranspiration and runoff from large land areas: Land surface hydrology for atmospheric general circulation models , 1991 .

[20]  Peter H. Stone,et al.  Efficient Three-Dimensional Global Models for Climate Studies: Models I and II , 1983 .

[21]  R. Koster,et al.  Modeling the land surface boundary in climate models as a composite of independent vegetation stands , 1992 .

[22]  G. K. Walker,et al.  Global Fields of Soil Moisture and Land Surface Evapotranspiration Derived from Observed Precipitation and Surface Air Temperature. , 1993 .

[23]  Piers J. Sellers,et al.  Effects of implementing the simple biosphere model in a general circulation model , 1989 .

[24]  Roger Davies,et al.  A fast radiation parameterization for atmospheric circulation models , 1987 .

[25]  C. Rosenzweig,et al.  Improved Ground Hydrology Calculations for Global Climate Models (GCMs): Soil Water Movement and Evapotranspiration , 1988 .

[26]  A. Arakawa,et al.  Interaction of a Cumulus Cloud Ensemble with the Large-Scale Environment, Part I , 1974 .