Gauging the ungauged basin: how many discharge measurements are needed?

Abstract. Runoff estimation in ungauged catchments is probably one of the most basic and oldest tasks of hydrologists. This long-standing issue has received increased attention recently due to the PUB (Prediction in Ungauged Basins) initiative. Given the challenges of predicting runoff for ungauged catchments one might argue that the best course of action is to take a few runoff measurements. In this study we explored how implementing such a procedure might support predictions in an ungauged basin. We used a number of monitored Swedish catchments as hypothetical ungauged basins where we pretended to start with no runoff data and then added different sub-sets of the available data to constrain a simple catchment model. These sub-sets consisted of a limited number of single runoff measurements; in other words these data represent what could be measured with limited efforts in an ungauged basin. We used a Monte Carlo approach and predicted runoff as a weighted ensemble mean of simulations using acceptable parameter sets. We found that the ensemble prediction clearly outperformed the predictions using single parameter sets and that surprisingly little runoff data was necessary to identify model parameterizations that provided good results for the "ungauged" test periods. These results indicated that a few runoff measurements can contain much of the information content of continuous runoff time series. However, the study also indicated that results may differ significantly between catchments and also depend on the days chosen for taking the measurements.

[1]  Patrick M. Reed,et al.  Reducing uncertainty in predictions in ungauged basins by combining hydrologic indices regionalization and multiobjective optimization , 2008, Water Resources Research.

[2]  K. Beven On undermining the science? , 2006 .

[3]  Jan Seibert,et al.  Regionalisation of parameters for a conceptual rainfall-runoff model , 1999 .

[4]  Keith Beven,et al.  The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. , 1992 .

[5]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  HELPing FRIENDs in PUBs: charting a course for synergies within international water research programmes in gauged and ungauged basins , 2006 .

[6]  P. Milly,et al.  Relating low‐flow characteristics to the base flow recession time constant at partial record stream gauges , 2007 .

[7]  Göran Lindström,et al.  Development and test of the distributed HBV-96 hydrological model , 1997 .

[8]  P. Mantovan,et al.  Hydrological forecasting uncertainty assessment: Incoherence of the GLUE methodology , 2006 .

[9]  Keith Beven,et al.  Vadose Zone Flow Model Uncertainty as Conditioned on Geophysical Data , 2003, Ground water.

[10]  P. E. O'connell,et al.  IAHS Decade on Predictions in Ungauged Basins (PUB), 2003–2012: Shaping an exciting future for the hydrological sciences , 2003 .

[11]  Keith Beven,et al.  Towards integrated environmental models of everywhere: uncertainty, data and modelling as a learning process , 2007 .

[12]  Cajo J. F. ter Braak,et al.  Treatment of input uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: Doing hydrology backward with Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation , 2008 .

[13]  Howard S. Wheater,et al.  Calibration of an in-river phosphorus model: prior evaluation of data needs and model uncertainty , 2004 .

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

[15]  George Kuczera,et al.  Bayesian analysis of input uncertainty in hydrological modeling: 1. Theory , 2006 .

[16]  S. Sorooshian,et al.  Evaluation of Maximum Likelihood Parameter estimation techniques for conceptual rainfall‐runoff models: Influence of calibration data variability and length on model credibility , 1983 .

[17]  Vazken Andréassian,et al.  Ungauged Catchments: How to Make the Most of a Few Streamflow Measurements? , 2006 .

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

[19]  D. Kavetski,et al.  Towards a Bayesian total error analysis of conceptual rainfall-runoff models: Characterising model error using storm-dependent parameters , 2006 .

[20]  S. Sorooshian,et al.  Automatic calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff models: sensitivity to calibration data , 1996 .

[21]  M. Sivapalan Prediction in ungauged basins: a grand challenge for theoretical hydrology , 2003 .

[22]  Gordon S. Blair,et al.  GridStix: supporting flood prediction using embedded hardware and next generation grid middleware , 2006, 2006 International Symposium on a World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks(WoWMoM'06).

[23]  K. Beven Environmental Modelling , 2007 .

[24]  Per-Olof Johansson,et al.  Temporal sampling strategies and uncertainty in calibrating a conceptual hydrological model for a small boreal catchment , 2009 .

[25]  J. Harlin,et al.  Parameter uncertainty and simulation of design floods in Sweden , 1992 .

[26]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Regionalization of constraints on expected watershed response behavior for improved predictions in ungauged basins , 2007 .

[27]  Keith Beven,et al.  So just why would a modeller choose to be incoherent , 2008 .

[28]  Keith Beven,et al.  Informal likelihood measures in model assessment: Theoretic development and investigation , 2008 .

[29]  C. Perrin,et al.  Impact of limited streamflow data on the efficiency and the parameters of rainfall—runoff models , 2007 .

[30]  Jan Seibert,et al.  Estimation of Parameter Uncertainty in the HBV Model , 1997 .

[31]  Michael Rode,et al.  Multi-objective calibration of a river water quality model—Information content of calibration data , 2007 .