Ecosystem adaptation to climate change: the sensitivity of hydrological predictions to time-dynamic model parameters

Abstract

Abstract. Future hydrological behavior in a changing world is typically predicted based on models that are calibrated on past observations, disregarding that hydrological systems and, therefore, model parameters may change as well. In reality, hydrological systems experience almost continuous change over a wide spectrum of temporal and spatial scales. In particular, there is growing evidence that vegetation adapts to changing climatic conditions by adjusting its root zone storage capacity, which is the key parameter of any terrestrial hydrological system. In addition, other species may become dominant, both under natural and anthropogenic influence. In this study, we test the sensitivity of hydrological model predictions to changes in vegetation parameters that reflect ecosystem adaptation to climate and potential land use changes. We propose a top-down approach, which directly uses projected climate data to estimate how vegetation adapts its root zone storage capacity at the catchment scale in response to changes in the magnitude and seasonality of hydro-climatic variables. Additionally, long-term water balance characteristics of different dominant ecosystems are used to predict the hydrological behavior of potential future land use change in a space-for-time exchange. We hypothesize that changes in the predicted hydrological response as a result of 2 K global warming are more pronounced when explicitly considering changes in the subsurface system properties induced by vegetation adaptation to changing environmental conditions. We test our hypothesis in the Meuse basin in four scenarios designed to predict the hydrological response to 2 K global warming in comparison to current-day conditions, using a process-based hydrological model with (a) a stationary system, i.e., no assumed changes in the root zone storage capacity of vegetation and historical land use, (b) an adapted root zone storage capacity in response to a changing climate but with historical land use and (c, d) an adapted root zone storage capacity considering two hypothetical changes in land use. We found that the larger root zone storage capacities (+34 %) in response to a more pronounced climatic seasonality with warmer summers under 2 K global warming result in strong seasonal changes in the hydrological response. More specifically, streamflow and groundwater storage are up to −15 % and −10 % lower in autumn, respectively, due to an up to +14 % higher summer evaporation in the non-stationary scenarios compared to the stationary benchmark scenario. By integrating a time-dynamic representation of changing vegetation properties in hydrological models, we make a potential step towards more reliable hydrological predictions under change.

Explaining changes in rainfall–runoff relationships during and after Australia's Millennium Drought: a community perspective

“…In terms of hydrological processes, tightly bound soil water, once seasonally depleted, likely receives priority in the seasonal re-wetting process (e.g. Brooks et al, 2010), since the mobility of water moving to the stream is restricted until after the soil pores have been replenished and the soil reaches field capacity.…”

“…There are many aspects of catchment behaviour that are not explicitly simulated but which may prove salient to determine the hydrologic response, such as transient ecosystem dynamics related to water stress and regrowth, in addition to anthropogenic factors (e.g. Van Loon et al, 2016;Speich et al, 2020;Stephens et al, 2021;Bouaziz et al, 2022). Non-linear behaviour and/or tipping points may be part of the response of a system to climate change (Rodriguez-Iturbe et al, 1999;Peterson et al, 2009Peterson et al, , 2021Tauro, 2021).…”

Seeing roots from space: aboveground fingerprints of root depth in vegetation sensitivity to climate in dry biomes

“…Depth to groundwater used in this analysis is defined as the maximum depth from the ground surface to the phreatic water table. Further, VSI was regressed against these metrics in order to compare published climate responses obtained using hydrological modelling to connect climate drivers to belowground water resources (Gao et al 2014, de Boer-euser et al 2019, Bouaziz et al 2022 against our approach of connecting aboveground climate-mediated vegetation responses to belowground traits.…”

An Approach to Evaluate Mountain Forest Protection and Management as a Means for Flood Mitigation

“…We could imagine the model then being parametrized based on different forest cover, climate conditions, and catchment characteristics, and simulated with actual and hypothetical forest cover and climate conditions under a factorial design (e.g., current and historical forest cover crossed with historical and current climate, respectively) (e.g., Li et al, 2012; • AFS EDI E3210A* Bundesamt für Wasserwirtschaft: Technische Akten Flussbau (1979-1999) (1845-1995) • Reforestation technical reports • Description of the torrents • Hydroelectric projects Buechel et al, 2022). The sensitivity analyses of the model parameters as well as the multivariate analyses of input variables and the resulting hydrographs will provide critical information on forest-hydrological regime-flood relations (e.g., Bouaziz et al, 2022). Model sensitivity combined with multivariate statistical analysis will serve to disentangle the complex interactions among forest policy, forest cover change, climate variables, catchment characteristics, and anthropogenic alterations in influencing hydrological regimes and flood occurrence.…”