The subsurface–land surface–atmosphere connection under convective conditions

Rahman, Mostaquimur; Sulis, Mauro; Kollet, Stefan

doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2015.06.003

Cited by 35 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The improved representation of runoff mechanisms and the ability of lateral water flow in Parflow‐WRF led to a different spatial pattern of land surface fluxes and affected atmospheric variables with relevance to wind energy applications. A series of works by Fan et al (), Miguez‐Macho et al (), Anyah et al (), Leung et al (), Shrestha et al (), Rahman et al (), Larsen, Christensen, et al (), Larsen, Højmark Rasmussen, et al (), and Wagner et al () have also explored the issue of atmospheric coupling to groundwater. Specifically, Anyah et al () applied the coupled regional climate‐hydrologic modeling system RAMS‐Hydro over North America to investigate the impact of water table dynamics on evapotranspiration ET and precipitation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rahman et al () performed an ensemble of fully coupled subsurface‐land surface‐atmosphere simulations for two convective precipitation events over Western Germany. They found that groundwater dynamics have an impact on soil moisture, surface fluxes, boundary layer dynamics, and precipitation, so that neglecting it would introduce a systematic uncertainty in the model.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Role of Lateral Terrestrial Water Flow on the Regional Water Cycle in a Complex Terrain Region: Investigation With a Fully Coupled Model System

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent developments in hydrometeorological modeling aim toward a more sophisticated treatment of terrestrial hydrologic processes. The objective of this study is to investigate the role of lateral terrestrial water flows on the regional atmospheric and terrestrial water cycle in a humid region of Central Europe. This is accomplished by evaluating model results from both the standard Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model and the hydrologically enhanced version WRF‐Hydro, which allows for a more comprehensive process description of the interdependencies between water and energy fluxes at the land‐atmosphere interface. To account for internal model variability, an ensemble for each model variant is generated for a 3‐month study period in the summer of 2005. The regional water cycle in the simulation domain is investigated by evaluating the ensemble results with a joint atmospheric‐terrestrial water budget analysis. We focus on six differently sized river catchments located in Southern Bavaria (Germany) and the southerly adjacent Eastern Alps, where simulation results are compared to observations of precipitation, near‐surface temperatures, and streamflow. Most prominently, WRF‐Hydro increases (near‐) surface runoff and decreases percolation, resulting in a reduced total runoff amount. Accordingly, soil moisture storage and evapotranspiration are increased. Domain‐averaged precipitation differences between WRF and WRF‐Hydro are essentially related to differences in atmospheric moisture inflow and outflow, which is the signature of internal model variability and is potentially enhanced in the WRF‐Hydro ensemble. Driven only at the boundaries of the outermost domain, the fully coupled model system shows good performance in the reproduction of observed streamflow.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of Lateral Terrestrial Water Flow on the Regional Water Cycle in a Complex Terrain Region: Investigation With a Fully Coupled Model System

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Szilagyi et al () further confirmed the link between groundwater and ET in Nebraska through observational data. In turn, these impacts may propagate into the atmospheric boundary layer, affecting the planetary boundary layer height, air temperature, convective available potential energy, and convection precipitation (e.g., Gilbert et al, ; Keune et al, ; Maxwell et al, ; Rahman et al, ; Rihani et al, ). A growing body of literature also suggests that lateral subsurface flow can substantially enhance the T / ET ratio (Fang et al, ; Maxwell & Condon, ), and this effect becomes slightly more significant for higher model resolutions (Shrestha et al, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Do Large‐Scale Land Surface Models Produce a Low Ratio of Transpiration to Evapotranspiration?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most land surface models (LSMs) used in Earth System Models produce a lower ratio of transpiration (T) to evapotranspiration (ET) than field observations, degrading the credibility of Earth System Model‐projected ecosystem responses and feedbacks to climate change. To interpret this model deficiency, we conducted a pair of model experiments using a three‐dimensional, process‐based ecohydrological model in a subhumid, mountainous catchment. One experiment (CTRL) describes lateral water flow, topographic shading, leaf dynamics, and water vapor diffusion in the soil, while the other (LSM like) does not explicitly describe these processes to mimic a conventional LSM using artificially flattened terrain. Averaged over the catchment, CTRL produced a higher T/ET ratio (72%) than LSM like (55%) and agreed better with an independent estimate (79.79 ± 27%) based on rainfall and stream water isotopes. To discern the exact causes, we conducted additional model experiments, each reverting only one process described in CTRL to that of LSM like. These experiments revealed that the enhanced T/ET ratio was mostly caused by lateral water flow and water vapor diffusion within the soil. In particular, terrain‐driven lateral water flows spread out soil moisture to a wider range along hillslopes with an optimum subrange from the middle to upper slopes, where evaporation (E) was more suppressed by the drier surface than T due to plant uptake of deep soil water, thereby enhancing T/ET. A more elaborate representation of water vapor diffusion from a dynamically changing evaporating surface to the height of the surface roughness length reduced E and increased the T/ET ratio.

show abstract

“…al., 2015), cloud formation (Rahman et al, 2015), and climate (Leung et al, 2011;Taylor et al, 2013). Lateral subsurface processes are fundamentally important on multiple spatial scales, including hill-slope scales (McNamara et al, 2005;Zhang et al, 2011), basin scales in semiarid and arid climates where regional aquifers sustain baseflows in rivers (Schaller and Fan, 2009) and wetlands (Fan and MiguezMacho, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Coupling a three-dimensional subsurface flow and transport model with a land surface model to simulate stream–aquifer–land interactions (CP v1.0)

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. A fully coupled three-dimensional surface and subsurface land model is developed and applied to a site along the Columbia River to simulate three-way interactions among river water, groundwater, and land surface processes. The model features the coupling of the Community Land Model version 4.5 (CLM4.5) and a massively parallel multiphysics reactive transport model (PFLOTRAN). The coupled model, named CP v1.0, is applied to a 400 m × 400 m study domain instrumented with groundwater monitoring wells along the Columbia River shoreline. CP v1.0 simulations are performed at three spatial resolutions (i.e., 2, 10, and 20 m) over a 5-year period to evaluate the impact of hydroclimatic conditions and spatial resolution on simulated variables. Results show that the coupled model is capable of simulating groundwater-river-water interactions driven by river stage variability along managed river reaches, which are of global significance as a result of over 30 000 dams constructed worldwide during the past half-century. Our numerical experiments suggest that the land-surface energy partitioning is strongly modulated by groundwater-river-water interactions through expanding the periodically inundated fraction of the riparian zone, and enhancing moisture availability in the vadose zone via capillary rise in response to the river stage change. Meanwhile, CLM4.5 fails to capture the key hydrologic process (i.e., groundwater-river-water exchange) at the site, and consequently simulates drastically different water and energy budgets. Furthermore, spatial resolution is found to significantly impact the accuracy of estimated the mass exchange rates at the boundaries of the aquifer, and it becomes critical when surface and subsurface become more tightly coupled with groundwater table within 6 to 7 meters below the surface. Inclusion of lateral subsurface flow influenced both the surface energy budget and subsurface transport processes as a result of river-water intrusion into the subsurface in response to an elevated river stage that increased soil moisture for evapotranspiration and suppressed available energy for sensible heat in the warm season. The coupled model developed in this study can be used for improving mechanistic understanding of ecosystem functioning and biogeochemical cycling along river corridors under historical and future hydroclimatic changes. The dataset presented in this study can also serve as a good benchmarking case for testing other integrated models.

show abstract

The subsurface–land surface–atmosphere connection under convective conditions

Cited by 35 publications

References 80 publications

Role of Lateral Terrestrial Water Flow on the Regional Water Cycle in a Complex Terrain Region: Investigation With a Fully Coupled Model System

Role of Lateral Terrestrial Water Flow on the Regional Water Cycle in a Complex Terrain Region: Investigation With a Fully Coupled Model System

Why Do Large‐Scale Land Surface Models Produce a Low Ratio of Transpiration to Evapotranspiration?

Coupling a three-dimensional subsurface flow and transport model with a land surface model to simulate stream–aquifer–land interactions (CP v1.0)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About