On the ability to infer spatial catchment variability using streamflow hydrographs

Spatially distributed models can potentially provide improved hydrologic predictions because of their ability to exploit spatially distributed data while providing estimates of hydrologic variables at interior catchment locations. However, attempts to estimate spatially distributed parameter fields via model calibration have been fraught with difficulty. This paper examines the factors that can influence the ability to infer spatial properties of a distributed model when the only information available for model evaluation is catchment streamflow response. In particular, we investigate the conditions under which spatial variability in parameters and rainfall cause sufficiently strong variations in the streamflow hydrographs to justify their representation in catchment models and whether such information can be detected via commonly used model performance measures. Our results show that spatial variability in parameter and precipitation fields can, indeed, have a detectable impact on the properties of the streamflow hydrograph but that this impact can be so greatly diminished by the damping and dispersive effects of routing that it is virtually nondetectable by conventional performance measures by the time the water reaches the catchment outlet. And although measures based on information theory may be able to detect subtle variations of this kind, the information may not ultimately be useful in the face of model structure and data errors. The only reasonable way forward therefore is to explore other kinds of catchment information (including multiple interior flow gauging locations) for use in estimation of spatially distributed parameter fields.

[1]  Qingyun Duan,et al.  Use of a Priori Parameter Estimates in the Derivation of Spatially Consistent Parameter Sets of Rainfall‐Runoff Models , 2013 .

[2]  Hoshin V. Gupta,et al.  On the use of spatial regularization strategies to improve calibration of distributed watershed models , 2010 .

[3]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling , 2009 .

[4]  Johan Alexander Huisman,et al.  Assessing the impact of land use change on hydrology by ensemble modelling (LUCHEM) IV: Model sensitivity to data aggregation and spatial (re-)distribution , 2009 .

[5]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  Gaussian processes for machine learning , 2005, Adaptive computation and machine learning.

[6]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  A spatial regularization approach to parameter estimation for a distributed watershed model , 2008 .

[7]  Andrea Rinaldo,et al.  On the impact of rainfall patterns on the hydrologic response , 2008 .

[8]  P. Reed,et al.  Rainfall characteristics define the value of streamflow observations for distributed watershed model identification , 2008 .

[9]  Prafulla Pokhrel Estimation Of Spatially Distributed Model Parameters Using A Regularization Approach , 2007 .

[10]  D. Seo,et al.  Overall distributed model intercomparison project results , 2004 .

[11]  Dong-Jun Seo,et al.  The distributed model intercomparison project (DMIP): Motivation and experiment design , 2004 .

[12]  Victor Koren,et al.  Runoff response to spatial variability in precipitation: an analysis of observed data , 2004 .

[13]  Armando Brath,et al.  Analysis of the effects of different scenarios of historical data availability on the calibration of a spatially-distributed hydrological model , 2004 .

[14]  Martijn J. Booij,et al.  Modelling the effects of spatial and temporal resolution of rainfall and basin model on extreme river discharge , 2002 .

[15]  K. Georgakakos,et al.  On the parametric and NEXRAD-radar sensitivities of a distributed hydrologic model suitable for operational use , 2001 .

[16]  Soroosh Sorooshian,et al.  Toward improved calibration of hydrologic models: Combining the strengths of manual and automatic methods , 2000 .

[17]  A. Brath,et al.  The effects of the spatial variability of soil infiltration capacity in distributed flood modelling , 2000 .

[18]  Victor Koren,et al.  Use of Soil Property Data in the Derivation of Conceptual Rainfall-Runoff Model Parameters , 2000 .

[19]  Bruno Merz,et al.  Effects of spatial variability on the rainfall runoff process in a small loess catchment , 1998 .

[20]  Vijay P. Singh,et al.  Effect of spatial and temporal variability in rainfall and watershed characteristics on stream flow hydrograph , 1997 .

[21]  Pierre Y. Julien,et al.  Similarity in Catchment Response: 1. Stationary Rainstorms , 1995 .

[22]  Keith Beven,et al.  Linking parameters across scales: Subgrid parameterizations and scale dependent hydrological models. , 1995 .

[23]  M. Seyfried,et al.  Scale and the Nature of Spatial Variability: Field Examples Having Implications for Hydrologic Modeling , 1995 .

[24]  Keith Beven,et al.  The sensitivity of hydrological models to spatial rainfall patterns: an evaluation using observed data , 1994 .

[25]  Pierre Y. Julien,et al.  Runoff sensitivity to temporal and spatial rainfall variability at runoff plane and small basin scales , 1993 .

[26]  P. Naden Spatial variability in flood estimation for large catchments: the exploitation of channel network structure , 1992 .

[27]  Witold F. Krajewski,et al.  A Monte Carlo Study of rainfall sampling effect on a distributed catchment model , 1991 .

[28]  Pierre Y. Julien,et al.  Similarity and length scale for spatially varied overland flow. , 1990 .

[29]  David A. Woolhiser,et al.  EFFECT OF STORM RAINFALL INTENSITY PATTERNS ON SURFACE RUNOFF , 1988 .

[30]  Murugesu Sivapalan,et al.  Spatial Heterogeneity and Scale in the Infiltration Response of Catchments , 1986 .

[31]  K. Beven,et al.  ASSESSING THE EFFECT OF SPATIAL PATTERN OF PRECIPITATION IN MODELING STREAM FLOW HYDROGRAPHS , 1982 .

[32]  Richard H. McCuen,et al.  A guide to hydrologic analysis using SCS methods , 1982 .

[33]  Roger E. Smith,et al.  A Monte Carlo Analysis of the hydrologic effects of spatial variability of infiltration , 1979 .

[34]  Juan B. Valdés,et al.  On the influence of the spatial distribution of rainfall on storm runoff , 1979 .

[35]  J. Parlange,et al.  A parameter‐efficient hydrologic infiltration model , 1978 .

[36]  Mark Reeves,et al.  Estimating infiltration for erratic rainfall , 1975 .

[37]  D. R. Nielsen,et al.  Spatial variability of field-measured soil-water properties , 1973 .

[38]  J. Philip THE THEORY OF INFILTRATION: 7 , 1958 .

[39]  J. Philip,et al.  The Theory of Infiltration , 1958 .

[40]  J. Philip,et al.  THE THEORY OF INFILTRATION: 6 EFFECT OF WATER DEPTH OVER SOIL , 1958 .

[41]  J. Philip THE THEORY OF INFILTRATION: 5. THE INFLUENCE OF THE INITIAL MOISTURE CONTENT , 1957 .

[42]  J. Philip,et al.  THE THEORY OF INFILTRATION: 4. SORPTIVITY AND ALGEBRAIC INFILTRATION EQUATIONS , 1957 .

[43]  J. Philip THE THEORY OF INFILTRATION: 3. MOISTURE PROFILES AND RELATION TO EXPERIMENT , 1957 .

[44]  J. Philip,et al.  THE THEORY OF INFILTRATION: 2. THE PROFILE OF INFINITY , 1957 .

[45]  J. Philip THE THEORY OF INFILTRATION: 1. THE INFILTRATION EQUATION AND ITS SOLUTION , 1957 .

[46]  L. K. Sherman Comparison f‐curves derived by the methods of sharp and Holtan and of Sherman and Mayer , 1943 .