4.7 Article

Characteristic mega-basin water storage behavior using GRACE

期刊

WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH
卷 49, 期 6, 页码 3314-3329

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/wrcr.20264

关键词

GRACE; global hydrology; storage; model; remote sensing

资金

  1. NASA GRACE
  2. Earth and Space Sciences Fellowship program
  3. University of California Office of the President MRPI program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A long-standing challenge for hydrologists has been a lack of observational data on global-scale basin hydrological behavior. With observations from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission, hydrologists are now able to study terrestrial water storage for large river basins (>200,000 km(2)), with monthly time resolution. Here we provide results of a time series model of basin-averaged GRACE terrestrial water storage anomaly and Global Precipitation Climatology Project precipitation for the world's largest basins. We address the short (10 year) length of the GRACE record by adopting a parametric spectral method to calculate frequency-domain transfer functions of storage response to precipitation forcing and then generalize these transfer functions based on large-scale basin characteristics, such as percent forest cover and basin temperature. Among the parameters tested, results show that temperature, soil water-holding capacity, and percent forest cover are important controls on relative storage variability, while basin area and mean terrain slope are less important. The derived empirical relationships were accurate (0.54 <= E-f <= 0.84) in modeling global-scale water storage anomaly time series for the study basins using only precipitation, average basin temperature, and two land-surface variables, offering the potential for synthesis of basin storage time series beyond the GRACE observational period. Such an approach could be applied toward gap filling between current and future GRACE missions and for predicting basin storage given predictions of future precipitation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据