A simple TOPMODEL‐based runoff parameterization (SIMTOP) for use in global climate models

Niu, Guo Yue; Yang, Zong‐Liang; Dickinson, Robert E.; Gulden, Lindsey E.

doi:10.1029/2005jd006111

Cited by 404 publications

(448 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

437

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The main difference can be found in the water cycle module, which simulates the dynamics of inundated surface water extent and water table position Liu et al, 2012. The new water cycle module uses components of previously published models, TOPMODEL (Topography based hydrological model; Beven and Kirkby, 1979), SIMTOP (Simple TOPMODEL; Niu et al, 2005) and CLM (Oleson et al, 2008), to improve its soil and surface water dynamics (Liu et al, 2012).…”

Section: Wetchimp Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

Present state of global wetland extent and wetland methane modelling: methodology of a model inter-comparison project (WETCHIMP)

Wania

Melton²,

Hodson³

et al. 2013

Geosci. Model Dev.

189

180

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The Wetland and Wetland CH 4 Intercomparison of Models Project (WETCHIMP) was created to evaluate our present ability to simulate large-scale wetland characteristics and corresponding methane (CH 4 ) emissions. A multi-model comparison is essential to evaluate the key uncertainties in the mechanisms and parameters leading to methane emissions. Ten modelling groups joined WETCHIMP to run eight global and two regional models with a common experimental protocol using the same climate and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) forcing datasets. We reported the main conclusions from the intercomparison effort in a companion paper (Melton et al., 2013). Here we provide technical details for the six experiments, which included an equilibrium, a transient, and an optimized run plus three sensitivity experiments (temperature, precipitation, and atmospheric CO 2 concentration). The diversity of approaches used by the models is summarized through a series of conceptual figures, and is used to evaluate the wide range of wetland extent and CH 4 fluxes predicted by the models in the equilibrium run. We discuss relationships among the various approaches and patterns in consistencies of these model predictions. Within this group of models, there are three broad classes of methods used to estimate wetland extent: prescribed based on wetland distribution maps, prognostic relationships between hydrological states based on satellite observations, and explicit hydrological mass balances. A larger variety of approaches was used to estimate the net CH 4 fluxes from wetland systems. Even though modelling of wetland extent and CH 4 emissions has progressed significantly over recent decades, large uncertainties still exist when estimating CH 4 emissions: there is little consensus on model structure or complexity due to knowledge gaps, different aims of the models, and the range of temporal and spatial resolutions of the models.

show abstract

Section: Wetchimp Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

Present state of global wetland extent and wetland methane modelling: methodology of a model inter-comparison project (WETCHIMP)

Wania

Melton²,

Hodson³

et al. 2013

Geosci. Model Dev.

189

180

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another important potential source of scalability advantage for SCLM over CLM besides snowfall may be its advantage in the calculation of topographic indices, which are important parameters in the SIMTOP surface runoff generation scheme [Niu et al, 2005;Oleson et al, 2010]. In CLM4, surface runoff (SRF) is composed of runoff generated at the saturated fraction (saturation excess) (see equations (4) and (5)) and unsaturated fraction (infiltration excess) of each modeling unit (subbasin or grid) [Li et al, 2011].…”

Section: Land Surface Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We then derived F max following the algorithms described in Niu et al [2005] in the same manner for each spatial resolution of both CLM and SCLM, except that for SCLM the CTIs are clipped following the boundaries of the subbasins in ArcGIS.…”

Section: Study Domainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scalability of grid- and subbasin-based land surface modeling approaches for hydrologic simulations

Tesfa

Leung

Huang

et al. 2014

J. Geophys. Res. Atmos.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the relative merits of grid-and subbasin-based land surface modeling approaches for hydrologic simulations, with a focus on their scalability (i.e., ability to perform consistently across spatial resolutions) in simulating runoff generation. Simulations are produced by the grid-and subbasin-based Community Land Model at 0.125°, 0.25°, 0.5°, and 1°spatial resolutions over the U.S. Pacific Northwest. Using the 0.125°simulation as the "reference" solution, statistical metrics are calculated by comparing simulations at 0.25°, 0.5°, and 1°resolutions with the 0.125°simulation for each approach. Statistical significance test results suggest significant scalability advantage for the subbasin-based approach compared to the grid-based approach. Basin level annual average relative errors of surface runoff at 0.25°, 0.5°, and 1°r esolutions compared to the 0.125°simulation are 3%, 4%, and 6% for the subbasin-based configuration and 4%, 7%, and 11% for the grid-based configuration, respectively. The scalability advantages are more pronounced during winter/spring and over mountainous regions. The source of runoff scalability is found to be related to the scalability of major meteorological and land surface parameters of runoff generation. More specifically, the subbasin-based approach is more consistent across spatial scales than the grid-based approach in snowfall/ rainfall partitioning because of scalability related to air temperature and surface elevation. Scalability of a topographic parameter used in runoff parameterization also contributes to improved scalability of the rain-driven saturated surface runoff component, particularly during winter. Hence, this study demonstrates the importance of spatial structure for multiscale modeling of hydrological processes.

show abstract

“…For more detailed descriptions of CLM4, we refer to four studies 12,[34][35][36] . With the groundwater representation, CLM4 can simulate the impacts of groundwater withdrawals on the atmospheric processes as in this study.…”

Section: Introduction Of Clm4mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The land model used in this study is the CLM4 12,34 with the representation of an unconfined aquifer model 35 and the SIMTOP (simple TOPMODEL-based) runoff generation scheme 36 . In the previous version of the CLM (CLM 3.0), the boundary condition at the bottom of soil layers was universally prescribed as the following gravity drainage flux q g (that is, the drainage is equal to the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity):…”

Section: Introduction Of Clm4mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fate of water pumped from underground and contributions to sea-level rise

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The contributions from terrestrial water sources to sea-level rise, other than ice caps and glaciers, are highly uncertain and heavily debated 1-5 . Recent assessments indicate that groundwater depletion (GWD) may become the most important positive terrestrial contribution 6-10 over the next 50 years, probably equal in magnitude to the current contributions from glaciers and ice caps 6 . However, the existing estimates assume that nearly 100% of groundwater extracted eventually ends up in the oceans. Owing to limited knowledge of the pathways and mechanisms governing the ultimate fate of pumped groundwater, the relative fraction of global GWD that contributes to sea-level rise remains unknown. Here, using a coupled climate-hydrological model 11,12 simulation, we show that only 80% of GWD ends up in the ocean. An increase in runo to the ocean accounts for roughly two-thirds, whereas the remainder results from the enhanced net flux of precipitation minus evaporation over the ocean, due to increased atmospheric vapour transport from the land to the ocean. The contribution of GWD to global sea-level rise amounted to 0.02 (±0.004) mm yr −1 in 1900 and increased to 0.27 (±0.04) mm yr −1 in 2000. This indicates that existing studies have substantially overestimated the contribution of GWD to global sea-level rise by a cumulative amount of at least 10 mm during the twentieth century and early twenty-first century. With other terrestrial water contributions included, we estimate the net terrestrial water contribution during the period 1993-2010 to be +0.12 (±0.04) mm yr −1 , suggesting that the net terrestrial water contribution reported in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report report is probably overestimated by a factor of three.Sea-level rise (SLR) is a direct effect of climate change, through the thermal expansion of ocean waters and the contribution of melt water from ice sheets, ice caps and glaciers. In an initial assessment 13 , the net contribution of sub-polar terrestrial water storage change to global sea-level variation was highly uncertain and heavily debated [14][15][16][17][18]

show abstract

A simple TOPMODEL‐based runoff parameterization (SIMTOP) for use in global climate models

Cited by 404 publications

References 31 publications

Present state of global wetland extent and wetland methane modelling: methodology of a model inter-comparison project (WETCHIMP)

Present state of global wetland extent and wetland methane modelling: methodology of a model inter-comparison project (WETCHIMP)

Scalability of grid- and subbasin-based land surface modeling approaches for hydrologic simulations

Fate of water pumped from underground and contributions to sea-level rise

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About