Precipitation in semi-arid countries such as Iran is one of the most important elements for all aspects of human life. In areas with sparse ground-based precipitation observation networks, the reliable high spatial and temporal resolution of satellite-based precipitation estimation might be the best source for meteorological and hydrological studies. In the present study, four different satellite rainfall estimates (CMORPH, PERSIANN, adjusted PERSIANN, and TRMM-3B42 V6) are evaluated using a relatively dense Islamic Republic of Iran's Meteorological Organization (IRIMO) rain-gauge network as reference. These evaluations were done at daily and monthly time scales with a spatial resolution of 0.25 Â 0.25 latitude/longitude. The topography of Iran is complicated and includes different, very diverse climates. For example, there is an extremely wet (low-elevation) Caspian Sea coastal region in the north, an arid desert in the center, and high mountainous areas in the west and north. Different rainfall regimes vary between these extremes. In order to conduct an objective intercomparison of the various satellite products, the study was designed to minimize the level of uncertainties in the evaluation process. To reduce gauge uncertainties, only the 32 pixels, which include at least five rain gauges, are considered. Evaluation results vary by different areas. The satellite products had a Probability of Detection (POD) greater than 40% in the southern part of the country and the regions of the Zagros Mountains. However, all satellite products exhibited poor performance over the Caspian Sea coastal region, where they underestimated precipitation in this relatively wet and moderate climate region. Seasonal analysis shows that spring precipitations are detected more accurately than winter precipitation, especially for the mountainous areas all over the country. Comparisons of different satellite products show that adj-PERSIANN and TRMM-3B42 V6 have better performance, and CMORPH has poor estimation, especially over the Zagros Mountains. The comparison between PER-SIANN and adj-PERSIANN shows that the bias adjustment improved the POD, which is a daily scale statistic.
Assessing the uncertainties and understanding the deficiencies of climate models are fundamental to developing adaptation strategies. The objective of this study is to understand how well Coupled Model Intercomparison-Phase 5 (CMIP5) climate model simulations replicate ground-based observations of continental drought areas and their trends. The CMIP5 multimodel ensemble encompasses the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) ground-based observations of area under drought at all time steps. However, most model members overestimate the areas under extreme drought, particularly in the Southern Hemisphere (SH). Furthermore, the results show that the time series of observations and CMIP5 simulations of areas under drought exhibit more variability in the SH than in the Northern Hemisphere (NH). The trend analysis of areas under drought reveals that the observational data exhibit a significant positive trend at the significance level of 0.05 over all land areas. The observed trend is reproduced by about three-fourths of the CMIP5 models when considering total land areas in drought. While models are generally consistent with observations at a global (or hemispheric) scale, most models do not agree with observed regional drying and wetting trends. Over many regions, at most 40% of the CMIP5 models are in agreement with the trends of CRU observations. The drying/wetting trends calculated using the 3 months Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) values show better agreement with the corresponding CRU values than with the observed annual mean precipitation rates. Pixel-scale evaluation of CMIP5 models indicates that no single model demonstrates an overall superior performance relative to the other models.
Numerical weather prediction models play a major role in weather forecasting, especially in cases of extreme events. The Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF), among others, is extensively used for both research and practical applications. Previous studies have highlighted the sensitivity of this model to microphysics and cumulus schemes. This study investigated the performance of the WRF in forecasting precipitation, hurricane track, and landfall time using various microphysics and cumulus schemes. A total of 20 combinations of microphysics and cumulus schemes were used, and the model outputs were validated against ground-based observations. While the choice of microphysics and cumulus schemes can significantly impact model output, it is not the case that any single combination can be considered ''ideal'' for modeling all characteristics of a hurricane, including precipitation amount, areal extent, hurricane track, and the time of landfall. For example, the model's ability to simulate precipitation (with the least total bias) is best achieved using Betts-Miller-Janjić (BMJ) cumulus parameterization in combination with the WRF single-moment five-class microphysics scheme (WSM5). It was determined that the WSM5-BMJ, WSM3 (the three-class version of the WSM scheme)-BMJ, and Ferrier microphysics in combination with the Grell-Devenyi cumulus scheme were the best combinations for simulation of the landfall time. However, the hurricane track was best estimated using the Lin et al. and Kessler microphysics options with BMJ cumulus parameterization. Contrary to previous studies, these results indicated that the use of cumulus schemes improves model outputs when the grid size is smaller than 10 km. However, it was found that many of the differences between parameterization schemes may be well within the uncertainty of the measurements.
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 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.