The value of glacier mass balance, satellite snow cover images, and hourly discharge for improving the performance of a physically based distributed hydrological model

Abstract

[1] Physically based hydrological models describe natural processes more accurately than conceptual models but require extensive data sets to produce accurate results. To identify the value of different data sets for improving the performance of the distributed hydrological model TOPKAPI we combine a multivariable validation technique with Monte Carlo simulations. The study is carried out in the snow and ice-dominated Rhonegletscher basin, as these types of mountainous basins are generally the most critical with respect to data availability and sensitivity to climate fluctuations. Each observational data set is used individually and in combination with the other data sets to determine a subset of best parameter combinations out of 10,000 Monte Carlos runs performed with randomly generated parameter sets. We validate model results against discharge, glacier mass balance, and satellite snow cover images for a 14 year time period (1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007). While the use of all data sets combined provides the best overall model performance (defined by the concurrent best agreement of simulated discharge, snow cover and mass balance with their respective measurements), the use of one or two variables for constraining the model results in poorer performance. Using only one data set for constraining the model glacier mass balance proved to be the most efficient observation leading to the best overall model performance. Our main result is that a combination of discharge and satellite snow cover images is best for improving model performance, since the volumetric information of discharge data and the spatial information of snow cover images are complementary.Citation: Finger, D., F. Pellicciotti, M. Konz, S. Rimkus, and P. Burlando (2011), The value of glacier mass balance, satellite snow cover images, and hourly discharge for improving the performance of a physically based distributed hydrological model, Water Resour.

Three perceptions of the evapotranspiration landscape: comparing spatial patterns from a distributed hydrological model, remotely sensed surface temperatures, and sub-basin water balances

“…But they agree with other researchers that incorporating additional site-specific information in a distributed hydrological model increases its robustness (Stisen et al, 2011). Especially remote sensing data are valued as a useful complement to station based time series (Finger et al, 2011;Liu et al, 2012).…”

Alpine aquatic ecosystem conservation policy in a changing climate

“…Contemporary relationships between benthic biodiversity and glacial influence (see, Knispel and Castella, 2003; were then used to inform our future predictions. A range of, hydrological and cryospheric variables were derived from a dynamic catchment hydrological model (TOPKAPI; Ciarapica and Todini, 2002), which has been significantly modified for use in mountainous environments (Finger et al, 2011). TOPKAPI was fed with downscaled climate scenarios (RCM:REMO) for the 2050 horizon (Fig.…”

Significant uncertainty in global scale hydrological modeling from precipitation data errors

“…This makes it rather difficult to find a single parameterization that adequately fits river discharge, soil moisture dynamics, and groundwater tables (Winsemius et al, 2006). Finger et al (2011) showed that the performance of a distributed hydrological model can be enhanced by including spatial datasets during calibration, for example snow depth or coverage. Unfortunately, data availability severely limits the possibilities of a multi-response calibration for global hydrological models.…”