[1] The problems of identifying the most appropriate model structure for a given problem and quantifying the uncertainty in model structure remain outstanding research challenges for the discipline of hydrology. Progress on these problems requires understanding of the nature of differences between models. This paper presents a methodology to diagnose differences in hydrological model structures: the Framework for Understanding Structural Errors (FUSE). FUSE was used to construct 79 unique model structures by combining components of 4 existing hydrological models. These new models were used to simulate streamflow in two of the basins used in the Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX): the Guadalupe River (Texas) and the French Broad River (North Carolina). Results show that the new models produced simulations of streamflow that were at least as good as the simulations produced by the models that participated in the MOPEX experiment. Our initial application of the FUSE method for the Guadalupe River exposed relationships between model structure and model performance, suggesting that the choice of model structure is just as important as the choice of model parameters. However, further work is needed to evaluate model simulations using multiple criteria to diagnose the relative importance of model structural differences in various climate regimes and to assess the amount of independent information in each of the models. This work will be crucial to both identifying the most appropriate model structure for a given problem and quantifying the uncertainty in model structure. To facilitate research on these problems, the FORTRAN-90 source code for FUSE is available upon request from the lead author.

The Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX) is an international project aimed at developing enhanced techniques for the a priori estimation of parameters in hydrologic models and in land surface parameterization schemes of atmospheric models. The MOPEX science strategy involves three major steps: data preparation, a priori parameter estimation methodology development, and demonstration of parameter transferability. A comprehensive MOPEX database has been developed that contains historical hydrometeorological data and land surface characteristics data for many hydrologic basins in the United States (US) and in other countries. This database is being continuously expanded to include more basins in all parts of the world. A number of international MOPEX workshops have been convened to bring together interested hydrologists and land surface modelers from all over world to exchange knowledge and experience in developing a priori parameter estimation techniques. (Q. Duan). This paper describes the results from the second and third MOPEX workshops. The specific objective of these workshops is to examine the state of a priori parameter estimation techniques and how they can be potentially improved with observations from well-monitored hydrologic basins. Participants of the second and third MOPEX workshops were provided with data from 12 basins in the southeastern US and were asked to carry out a series of numerical experiments using a priori parameters as well as calibrated parameters developed for their respective hydrologic models. Different modeling groups carried out all the required experiments independently using eight different models, and the results from these models have been assembled for analysis in this paper. This paper presents an overview of the MOPEX experiment and its design. The main experimental results are analyzed. A key finding is that existing a priori parameter estimation procedures are problematic and need improvement. Significant improvement of these procedures may be achieved through model calibration of well-monitored hydrologic basins. This paper concludes with a discussion of the lessons learned, and points out further work and future strategy. q

Abstract. We present a community data set of daily forcing and hydrologic response data for 671 small-to mediumsized basins across the contiguous United States (median basin size of 336 km 2 ) that spans a very wide range of hydroclimatic conditions. Area-averaged forcing data for the period 1980-2010 was generated for three basin spatial configurations -basin mean, hydrologic response units (HRUs) and elevation bands -by mapping daily, gridded meteorological data sets to the subbasin (Daymet) and basin polygons (Daymet, Maurer and NLDAS). Daily streamflow data was compiled from the United States Geological Survey National Water Information System. The focus of this paper is to (1) present the data set for community use and (2) provide a model performance benchmark using the coupled Snow-17 snow model and the Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting Model, calibrated using the shuffled complex evolution global optimization routine. After optimization minimizing daily root mean squared error, 90 % of the basins have NashSutcliffe efficiency scores ≥ 0.55 for the calibration period and 34 % ≥ 0.8. This benchmark provides a reference level of hydrologic model performance for a commonly used model and calibration system, and highlights some regional variations in model performance. For example, basins with a more pronounced seasonal cycle generally have a negative low flow bias, while basins with a smaller seasonal cycle have a positive low flow bias. Finally, we find that data points with extreme error (defined as individual days with a high fraction of total error) are more common in arid basins with limited snow and, for a given aridity, fewer extreme error days are present as the basin snow water equivalent increases.

Simulated daily precipitation, temperature, and runoff time series were compared in three mountainous basins in the United States: (1) the Animas River basin in Colorado, (2) the East Fork of the Carson River basin in Nevada and California, and (3) the Cle Elum River basin in Washington State. Two methods of climate scenario generation were compared: delta change and statistical downscaling. The delta change method uses differences between simulated current and future climate conditions from the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research (HadCM2) General Circulation Model (GCM) added to observed time series of climate variables. A statistical downscaling (SDS) model was developed for each basin using station data and output from the National Center for Environmental Prediction/National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCEPINCAR) reanalysis regridded to the scale of HadCM2. The SDS model was then used to simulate local climate variables using HadCM2 output for current and future conditions. Surface climate variables from each scenario were used in a precipitation‐runoff model. Results from this study show that, in the basins tested, a precipitation‐runoff model can simulate realistic runoff series for current conditions using statistically down‐scaled NCEP output. But, use of downscaled HadCM2 output for current or future climate assessments are questionable because the GCM does not produce accurate estimates of the surface variables needed for runoff in these regions. Given the uncertainties in the GCMs ability to simulate current conditions based on either the delta change or downscaling approaches, future climate assessments based on either of these approaches must be treated with caution.