Understanding the effects of climate change on the vegetative growing season is key to quantifying future hydrologic water budget conditions. The U.S. Geological Survey modeled changes in future growing season length at 14 basins across 11 states. Simulations for each basin were generated using five general circulation models with three emission scenarios as inputs to the Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System (PRMS). PRMS is a deterministic, distributed-parameter, watershed model developed to simulate the effects of various combinations of precipitation, climate, and land use on watershed response. PRMS was modified to include a growing season calculation in this study. The growing season was examined for trends in the total length (annual), as well as changes in the timing of onset (spring) and the end (fall) of the growing season. The results showed an increase in the annual growing season length in all 14 basins, averaging 27-47 days for the three emission scenarios. The change in the spring and fall growing season onset and end varied across the 14 basins, with larger increases in the total length of the growing season occurring in the mountainous regions and smaller increases occurring in the Midwest, Northeast, and Southeast regions. The Clear Creek basin, 1 of the 14 basins in this study, was evaluated to examine the growing season length determined by emission scenario, as compared to a growing season length fixed baseline condition. The Clear Creek basin showed substantial variation in hydrologic responses, including streamflow, as a result of growing season length determined by emission scenario.
The standard unit for transmissivity is cubic foot per day per square foot times foot of aquifer thickness [(ft 3 /d)/ft 2 ]ft. In this report, the mathematically reduced form, foot squared per day (ft 2 /d), is used for convenience.
The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, used the Soil and Water Assessment Tool to simulate streamflow and nitrate loads within the Cedar River Basin, Iowa. The goal was to assess the ability of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool to estimate streamflow and nitrate loads in gaged and ungaged basins in Iowa. The Cedar River Basin model uses measured streamflow data from 12 U.S. Geological Survey streamflowgaging stations for hydrology calibration. The U.S. Geological Survey software program, Load Estimator, was used to estimate annual and monthly nitrate loads based on measured nitrate concentrations and streamflow data from three Iowa Department of Natural Resources Storage and Retrieval/Water Quality Exchange stations, located throughout the basin, for nitrate load calibration. The hydrology of the model was calibrated for the period of January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2004, and validated for the period of January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2010. Simulated daily, monthly, and annual streamflow resulted in Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient of model efficiency (E NS) values ranging from 0.44 to 0.83, 0.72 to 0.93, and 0.56 to 0.97, respectively, and coefficient of determination (R 2) values ranging from 0.55 to 0.87, 0.74 to 0.94, and 0.65 to 0.99, respectively, for the calibration period. The percent bias ranged from-19 to 10,-16 to 10, and-19 to 10 for daily, monthly, and annual simulation, respectively. The validation period resulted in daily, monthly, and annual E NS values ranging from 0.49 to 0.77, 0.69 to 0.91, and-0.22 to 0.95, respectively; R 2 values ranging from 0.59 to 0.84, 0.74 to 0.92, and 0.36 to 0.92, respectively; and percent bias ranging from-16 for all time steps to percent bias of 14, 15, and 15, respectively. The nitrate calibration was based on a small subset of the locations used in the hydrology calibration with limited measured data. Model performance ranges from unsatisfactory to very good for the calibration period (January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2004). Results for the validation period (January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2010) indicate a need for an increase of measured data as well as more refined documented management practices at a higher resolution. Simulated nitrate loads resulted in monthly and annual E NS values ranging from 0.28 to 0.82 and 0.61 to 0.86, respectively, and monthly and annual R 2 values ranging from 0.65 to 0.81 and 0.65 to 0.88, respectively, for the calibration period. The monthly and annual calibration percent bias ranged from 4 to 7 and 5 to 7, respectively. The validation period resulted in all but two E NS values less than zero. Monthly and annual validation R 2 values ranged from 0.5 to 0.67 and 0.25 to 0.48, respectively. Monthly and annual validation percent bias ranged from 46 to 68 for both time steps. A daily calibration and validation for nitrate loads was not performed because of the poor monthly and annual results; measured daily nitrate data are available for intervals of time in 2009 and 2010 during which a...
For more information on the USGS-the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS.For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprodTo order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.Suggested citation: Christiansen, D.E., 2012, Simulation of daily streamflows at gaged and ungaged locations within the Cedar River Basin, Iowa, using a Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System model: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012-5213, 20 p. iii AcknowledgmentsThe author would like to express gratitude to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Iowa Geological and Water Survey for their assistance in project planning. The author would also like to express appreciation to other USGS personnel who assisted with the collection and analysis of streamflow and GIS-related information used in this study. Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). ContentsAltitude, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum. Simulation of Daily Streamflows at Gaged and Ungaged Locations within the Cedar River Basin, Iowa, Using a Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System ModelBy Daniel E. Christiansen AbstractThe U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, conducted a study to examine techniques for estimation of daily streamflows using hydrological models and statistical methods. This report focuses on the use of a hydrologic model, the U.S. Geological Survey's Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System, to estimate daily streamflows at gaged and ungaged locations. The Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System is a modular, physically based, distributed-parameter modeling system developed to evaluate the impacts of various combinations of precipitation, climate, and land use on surface-water runoff and general basin hydrology. The Cedar River Basin was selected to construct a Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System model that simulates the period from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2010. The calibration period was from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2004, and the validation periods were from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2010 A Geographic Information System tool was used to delineate the Cedar River Basin and subbasins for the PrecipitationRunoff Modeling System model and to derive parameters based on the physical geographical features. Calibration of the Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System model was completed usin...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with đź’™ for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.