4.7 Article

Comparing Palmer Drought Severity Index drought assessments using the traditional offline approach with direct climate model outputs

期刊

HYDROLOGY AND EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCES
卷 24, 期 6, 页码 2921-2930

出版社

COPERNICUS GESELLSCHAFT MBH
DOI: 10.5194/hess-24-2921-2020

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41890821]
  2. Qinghai Department of Science and Technology [2019-SF-A4]
  3. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [2019YFC1510604]
  4. Australian Research Council [CE170100023]
  5. CSIRO Land and Water

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Anthropogenic warming has been projected to increase global drought for the 21st century when calculated using traditional offline drought indices. However, this contradicts observations of the overall global greening and little systematic change in runoff over the past few decades and climate projections of future greening with slight increases in global runoff for the coming century. This calls into question the drought projections based on traditional offline drought indices. Here we calculate a widely used traditional drought index (i.e., the Palmer Drought Severity Index, PDSI) using direct outputs from 16 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) models (PDSI_CMIP5) such that the hydrologic consistency between PDSI_CMIP5 and CMIP5 models is maintained. We find that the PDSI_CMIP5-depicted drought increases (in terms of drought severity, frequency, and extent) are much smaller than that reported when PDSI is calculated using the traditional offline approach that has been widely used in previous drought assessments under climate change. Further analyses indicate that the overestimation of PDSI drought increases reported previously using the PDSI is primarily due to ignoring the vegetation response to elevated atmospheric CO2 concentration ([CO2]) in the traditional offline calculations. Finally, we show that the overestimation of drought using the traditional PDSI approach can be minimized by accounting for the effect of CO2 on evapotranspiration.

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