Regionalization of SWAT Model Parameters for Use in Ungauged Watersheds

Gitau, Margaret W.; Chaubey, Indrajeet

doi:10.3390/w2040849

Cited by 87 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 33 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These comparisons for the three regionalization approaches used in this study show that the median values were considered unsatisfactory for both the calibration and validation watersheds, and compared poorly with the results obtained by Gitau and Chaubey [13] and Parajka et al [12] It may be said that none of the three approaches used in this investigation gave even marginally satisfactory results, based on both the NSE and PBIAS test statistics. Of the three methods, only two calibration and two validation watersheds were considered satisfactory for the regional average approach, none was considered satisfactory for the nearest neighbor approach, and only one calibration watershed was considered satisfactory for the donor approach.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

“…Test results from this study were compared to results from two previous studies (Gitau and Chaubey [13] and Parajka et al [12] For the present study, median NSE values for monthly streamflow using the regional average approach were 0.40 and 0.28 for the source and validation watersheds, respectively. The median NSE value for monthly streamflow was 0.69 for calibrated watersheds used in the study by Gitau and Chaubey, [13] while the median daily streamflow NSE values for calibrated and validated values were 0.61 and 0.56 in the study performed by Parajka et al [12] In the comparison of the nearest neighbor approach in this study, median monthly NSE values were -0.07 and 0.05 for the source and validated watersheds, respectively, while Parajka et al [12] reported median daily NSE values of 0.66 and 0.61, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The median NSE value for monthly streamflow was 0.69 for calibrated watersheds used in the study by Gitau and Chaubey, [13] while the median daily streamflow NSE values for calibrated and validated values were 0.61 and 0.56 in the study performed by Parajka et al [12] In the comparison of the nearest neighbor approach in this study, median monthly NSE values were -0.07 and 0.05 for the source and validated watersheds, respectively, while Parajka et al [12] reported median daily NSE values of 0.66 and 0.61, respectively. Results obtained from the donor approach used in this study show that median monthly NSE values were -0.07 and 0.00, compared to median daily NSE values of 0.67 and 0.61 obtained by Parajka et al, [12] respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Van Liew and Garbrecht [40] reported NSE values ranging from -4.49 to -1.88 for default parameters in SWAT on two subwatersheds of the Little Washita Experimental Watershed in Oklahoma during a period of record from 1992 to 2000. Under the default mode, Gitau and Chaubey [13] reported NSE values ranging from -1.96 to 0.61 for five watersheds in Arkansas that they simulated with SWAT from 1998 to 2000.…”

Section: Default and Calibrated Simulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The best results obtained using spatial and donor approaches gave median daily runoff Nash-Sutcliffe Coefficient of Efficiency (NSE) values of 0.62 and 0.61, respectively, for validation watersheds used in their study. Gitau and Chaubey [13] used global averaging and regression based parameters to evaluate model performance on ungaged watersheds in Arkansas using SWAT. Their findings show that the global averaging method gave monthly NSE values that ranged from 0.40 to 0.75, while monthly NSE values for the regression approach ranged from 0.53 to 0.83.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Comparison of three regionalization techniques for predicting streamflow in ungaged watersheds in Nebraska, USA using SWAT model

Liew

Mittelstet

2018

International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compared three approaches, regional averaging, nearest neighbor, and donor techniques, to regionalize parameters in the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) on eleven watersheds located in the Dissected Plains, Plains, and Rolling Hills Landforms in the eastern portion of the State of Nebraska, USA. Within the Rolling Hills Landform, three watersheds were randomly selected as calibration watersheds while two were randomly selected as validation watersheds. Two watersheds were randomly selected as calibration watersheds while one was randomly selected as a validation watershed within each of the Dissected Plains and Plains Landforms. The seven calibration watersheds were used to provide the necessary calibrated parameter sets to execute each of the regional approaches, while the four validation watersheds were used to assess the impact of applying each of these approaches to an uncalibrated watershed. Percent Bias (PBIAS) and the Nash Sutcliffe Coefficient of Efficiency (NSE) were used to assess model performance. Test results of this study show that all three methods performed poorly, since the majority of watersheds among each method tested exhibited PBIAS values greater than ±25% and/or NSE values less than 0.50, which were considered to be unsatisfactory in terms of model performance. The average regionalization, nearest neighbor and donor methods resulted in only four (two calibration and two validation), zero and one satisfactory set of simulated watershed results, respectively.The findings from this study indicate that although each watershed was successfully calibrated with NSE values ranging from 0.51 to 0.84, none of the three regionalization methods provided suitable calibration data sets to define parameter values for performing satisfactory simulations on ungaged watersheds across the eastern Nebraska landscape.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Default and Calibrated Simulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparison of three regionalization techniques for predicting streamflow in ungaged watersheds in Nebraska, USA using SWAT model

Liew

Mittelstet

2018

International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Identifying threshold storm events and quantifying potential impacts of climate change on sediment yield in a small upland agricultural watershed of Ontario

Shrestha

Allataifeh

Rudra

et al. 2019

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural zones are significant sediment sources, but it is crucial to identify critical source areas (CSAs) of sediment yield within these zones where best management practices (BMPs) can be applied to the best effect in reducing sediment delivery to receiving water bodies rather than the economically nonviable alternative of randomly or sweepingly implementing BMPs. A storm event of a specific magnitude and hyetograph profile may, at different times, generate a greater or lesser sediment yield. The widely used agricultural nonpoint source (AGNPS) model was used to identify CSAs for sediment losses in Southwestern Ontario's agriculture‐dominated 374‐ha Holtby watershed. A storm threshold approach was adopted to identify critical periods for higher sediment losses. An AGNPS model for the Holtby watershed was set up, calibrated, and validated for run‐off volume, peak flow rate, and sediment yield for several storms. The calibrated and validated model was run for storms of increasing return periods to identify threshold storm events that would generate sediment yield greater than an acceptable value for early and late spring, summer, and fall seasons. Finally, to evaluate the potential impacts of climate change, we shifted shorter duration summer storms into spring conditions and quantified the changes in sediment yield dynamics. A 6‐hr, 7.5‐year early spring storm would generate sediment losses exceeding the acceptable limit of 0.34 t ha−1 for the season. However, summer storms (2 hr, up to 100 years) tended to generate sediment yields below those of an identifiable threshold storm. If such shorter duration summer storms occurred in spring, the sediment yield would increase by more than fivefold. A 5‐year future storm would generate an equivalent effect of a 100‐year current spring event. The high sediment delivery to be expected will have significant implications regarding the future management of water quality of receiving waters. Appropriate placement of BMPs at CSAs will thus be needed to reduce such high sediment delivery to receiving waters.

show abstract

How to improve the representation of hydrological processes in SWAT for a lowland catchment – temporal analysis of parameter sensitivity and model performance

Guse

Reusser

Fohrer

2013

Hydrological Processes

131

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Model diagnostic analyses help to improve the understanding of hydrological processes and their representation in hydrological models. A detailed temporal analysis detects periods of poor model performance and model components with potential for model improvements, which cannot be found by analysing the whole discharge time series. In this study, we aim to improve the understanding of hydrological processes by investigating the temporal dynamics of parameter sensitivity and of model performance for the Soil and Water Assessment Tool model applied to the Treene lowland catchment in Northern Germany. The temporal analysis shows that the parameter sensitivity varies temporally with high sensitivity for three groundwater parameters (groundwater time delay, baseflow recession constant and aquifer fraction coefficient) and one evaporation parameter (soil evaporation compensation factor). Whereas the soil evaporation compensation factor dominates in baseflow and resaturation periods, groundwater time delay, baseflow recession constant and aquifer fraction coefficient are dominant in the peak and recession phases. The temporal analysis of model performance identifies three clusters with different model performances, which can be related to different phases of the hydrograph. The lowest performance, when comparing six performance measures, is detected for the baseflow cluster. A spatially distributed analysis for six hydrological stations within the Treene catchment shows similar results for all stations. The linkage of periods with poor model performance to the dominant model components in these phases and with the related hydrological processes shows that the groundwater module has the highest potential for improvement. This temporal diagnostic analysis enhances the understanding of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool model and of the dominant hydrological processes in the lowland catchment. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Regionalization of SWAT Model Parameters for Use in Ungauged Watersheds

Cited by 87 publications

References 33 publications

Comparison of three regionalization techniques for predicting streamflow in ungaged watersheds in Nebraska, USA using SWAT model

Comparison of three regionalization techniques for predicting streamflow in ungaged watersheds in Nebraska, USA using SWAT model

Identifying threshold storm events and quantifying potential impacts of climate change on sediment yield in a small upland agricultural watershed of Ontario

How to improve the representation of hydrological processes in SWAT for a lowland catchment – temporal analysis of parameter sensitivity and model performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About