Accessibility navigation


Global scale evaluation of precipitation datasets for hydrological modelling

Gebrechorkos, S. H., Leyland, J., Dadson, S. J., Cohen, S., Slater, L., Wortmann, M., Ashworth, P. J., Bennett, G. L., Boothroyd, R., Cloke, H. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1472-868X, Delorme, P., Griffith, H., Hardy, R., Hawker, L., McLelland, S., Neal, J., Nicholas, A., Tatem, A. J., Vahidi, E., Liu, Y. , Sheffield, J., Parsons, D. R. and Darby, S. E. (2024) Global scale evaluation of precipitation datasets for hydrological modelling. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. ISSN 1027-5606 (In Press)

[img] Text - Accepted Version
· Restricted to Repository staff only
· The Copyright of this document has not been checked yet. This may affect its availability.

2MB

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

To link to this item DOI: 10.5194/hess-2023-251

Abstract/Summary

Precipitation is the most important driver of the hydrological cycle but is challenging to estimate over large scales from satellites and models. Here, we assessed the performance of six global and quasi-global high resolution precipitation datasets (ERA5 global reanalysis (ERA5), Climate Hazards group Infrared Precipitation with Stations version 2.0 (CHIRPS), Multi-Source Weighted-Ensemble Precipitation version 2.80 (MSWEP), TerraClimate (TERRA), Climate Prediction Centre Unified version 1.0 (CPCU) and Precipitation Estimation from Remotely Sensed Information using Artificial Neural Networks-Cloud Classification System-Climate Data Record (PERCCDR)) for hydrological modelling globally and quasi-globally. We forced the WBMsed global hydrological model with the precipitation datasets to simulate river discharge from 1983 to 2019 and evaluated the predicted discharge against more than 1800 hydrological stations worldwide, using a range of statistical methods. The results show large differences in the accuracy of discharge predictions when using different precipitation input datasets. Based on evaluation at annual, monthly and daily time scales, MSWEP followed by ERA5 demonstrated a higher CC and KGE than other datasets for more than 50% of the stations. Whilst, ERA5 was the second-highest performing dataset, it showed the highest error and bias in about 20% of the stations. The PERCCDR is the least well-performing dataset with large bias (percentage of bias up to 99%) and errors (normalised root mean square error up to 247%) with a higher KGE and CC than the other products in less than 10% of the stations. Even though MSWEP provided the highest performance overall, our analysis reveals high spatial variability, meaning that it is important to consider other datasets in areas where MSWEP showed a lower performance. The results of this study provide guidance on the selection of precipitation datasets for modelling river discharge for a basin, region or climatic zone as there is no single best precipitation dataset globally. Finally, the large discrepancy in the performance of the datasets in different parts of the world highlights the need to improve global precipitation data products.

Item Type:Article
Refereed:Yes
Divisions:Science > School of Archaeology, Geography and Environmental Science > Department of Geography and Environmental Science
Science > School of Mathematical, Physical and Computational Sciences > Department of Meteorology
ID Code:116749
Publisher:Copernicus

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Page navigation