Comparison and Evaluation of Gridded Precipitation Datasets in a Kansas Agricultural Watershed Using SWAT

Gridded precipitation datasets are becoming a convenient substitute for gauge measurements in hydrological modeling; however, these data have not been fully evaluated across a range of conditions. We compared four gridded datasets (Daily Surface Weather and Climatological Summaries [DAYMET], North American Land Data Assimilation System [NLDAS], Global Land Data Assimilation System [GLDAS], and Parameter‐elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model [PRISM]) as precipitation data sources and evaluated how they affected hydrologic model performance when compared with a gauged dataset, Global Historical Climatology Network‐Daily (GHCN‐D). Analyses were performed for the Delaware Watershed at Perry Lake in eastern Kansas. Precipitation indices for DAYMET and PRISM precipitation closely matched GHCN‐D, whereas NLDAS and GLDAS showed weaker correlations. We also used these precipitation data as input to the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model that confirmed similar trends in streamflow simulation. For stations with complete data, GHCN‐D based SWAT‐simulated streamflow variability better than gridded precipitation data. During low flow periods we found PRISM performed better, whereas both DAYMET and NLDAS performed better in high flow years. Our results demonstrate that combining gridded precipitation sources with gauge‐based measurements can improve hydrologic model performance, especially for extreme events.     

EVALUATION OF NEXRAD STAGE III PRECIPITATION DATA OVER A SEMIARID REGION1

This study examines NEXRAD Stage III product (hourly, cell size 4 km by 4 km) for its ability in estimating precipitation in central New Mexico, a semiarid area. A comparison between Stage III and a network of gauge precipitation estimates during 1995 to 2001 indicates that Stage III (1) overestimates the hourly conditional mean (CM) precipitation by 33 percent in the monsoon season and 55 percent in the nonmonsoon season; (2) overestimates the hourly CM precipitation for concurrent radar‐gauge pairs (nonzero value) by 13 percent in the monsoon season and 6 percent in the nonmonsoon season; (3) overestimates the seasonal precipitation accumulation by 11 to 88 percent in monsoon season and underestimates by 18 to 89 percent in the nonmonsoon season; and (4) either overestimates annual precipitation accumulation up to 28.2 percent or underestimates it up to 11.9 percent. A truncation of 57 to 72 percent of the total rainfall hours is observed in the Stage III data in the nonmonsoon season, which may be the main cause for both the underestimation of the radar rainfall accumulation and the lower conditional probability of radar rainfall detection in the nonmonsoon season. The study results indicate that the truncation caused loss of small rainfall amounts (events) is not effectively corrected by the real‐time rain gauge calibration that can adjust the rainfall rates but cannot recover the truncated small rainfall events. However, the truncation error in the monsoon season may be suppressed due to the larger rainfall rate and/or combined effect of overestimates by bright band and hail contaminations, virga, advection, etc. In general, improvement in NEXRAD performance since the monsoon season in 1998 is observed, which is consistent with the systematic improvement in the NEXRAD network.     

Modeling the Spatially Varying Water Balance Processes in a Semiarid Mountainous Watershed of Idaho1

Stratton, Benjamin T., Venakataramana Sridhar, Molly M. Gribb, James P. McNamara, and Balaji Narasimhan, 2009. Modeling the Spatially Varying Water Balance Processes in a Semiarid Mountainous Watershed of Idaho. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 45(6):1390‐1408. Abstract: The distributed Soil Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) hydrologic model was applied to a research watershed, the Dry Creek Experimental Watershed, near Boise Idaho to investigate its water balance components both temporally and spatially. Calibrating and validating SWAT is necessary to enable our understanding of the water balance components in this semiarid watershed. Daily streamflow data from four streamflow gages were used for calibration and validation of the model. Monthly estimates of streamflow during the calibration phase by SWAT produced satisfactory results with a Nash Sutcliffe coefficient of model efficiency 0.79. Since it is a continuous simulation model, as opposed to an event‐based model, it demonstrated the limited ability in capturing both streamflow and soil moisture for selected rain‐on‐snow (ROS) events during the validation period between 2005 and 2007. Especially, soil moisture was generally underestimated compared with observations from two monitoring pits. However, our implementation of SWAT showed that seasonal and annual water balance partitioning of precipitation into evapotranspiration, streamflow, soil moisture, and drainage was not only possible but closely followed the trends of a typical semiarid watershed in the intermountain west. This study highlights the necessity for better techniques to precisely identify and drive the model with commonly observed climatic inversion‐related snowmelt or ROS weather events. Estimation of key parameters pertaining to soil (e.g., available water content and saturated hydraulic conductivity), snow (e.g., lapse rates, melting), and vegetation (e.g., leaf area index and maximum canopy index) using additional field observations in the watershed is critical for better prediction.     

Physically Based,Hydrologic Model Results Based on Three Precipitation Products1

Abstract: The main objective of the study is to examine the accuracy of and differences among simulated streamflows driven by rainfall estimates from a network of 22 rain gauges spread over a 2,170 km² watershed, NEXRAD Stage III radar data, and Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) 3B42 satellite data. The Gridded Surface Subsurface Hydrologic Analysis (GSSHA), a physically based, distributed parameter, grid‐structured, hydrologic model, was used to simulate the June‐2002 flooding event in the Upper Guadalupe River watershed in south central Texas. There were significant differences between the rainfall fields estimated by the three types of measurement technologies. These differences resulted in even larger differences in the simulated hydrologic response of the watershed. In general, simulations driven by radar rainfall yielded better results than those driven by satellite or rain‐gauge estimates. This study also presents an overview of effects of land cover changes on runoff and stream discharge. The results demonstrate that, for major rainfall events similar to the 2002 event, the effect of urbanization on the watershed in the past two decades would not have made any significant effect on the hydrologic response. The effect of urbanization on the hydrologic response increases as the size of the rainfall event decreases.     

HYDROLOGIC SIMULATION OF THE LITTLE WASHITA RIVER EXPERIMENTAL WATERSHED USING SWAT1

ABSTRACT: Precipitation and streamflow data from three nested subwatersheds within the Little Washita River Experimental Watershed (LWREW) in southwestern Oklahoma were used to evaluate the capabilities of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) to predict streamflow under varying climatic conditions. Eight years of precipitation and streamflow data were used to calibrate parameters in the model, and 15 years of data were used for model validation. SWAT was calibrated on the smallest and largest sub‐watersheds for a wetter than average period of record. The model was then validated on a third subwatershed for a range in climatic conditions that included dry, average, and wet periods. Calibration of the model involved a multistep approach. A preliminary calibration was conducted to estimate model parameters so that measured versus simulated yearly and monthly runoff were in agreement for the respective calibration periods. Model parameters were then fine tuned based on a visual inspection of daily hydrographs and flow frequency curves. Calibration on a daily basis resulted in higher baseflows and lower peak runoff rates than were obtained in the preliminary calibration. Test results show that once the model was calibrated for wet climatic conditions, it did a good job in predicting streamflow responses over wet, average, and dry climatic conditions selected for model validation. Monthly coefficients of efficiencies were 0.65, 0.86, and 0.45 for the dry, average, and wet validation periods, respectively. Results of this investigation indicate that once calibrated, SWAT is capable of providing adequate simulations for hydrologic investigations related to the impact of climate variations on water resources of the LWREW.     

Observed Changes in Climate and Streamflow in the Upper Rio Grande Basin

Observed streamflow and climate data are used to test the hypothesis that climate change is already affecting Rio Grande streamflow volume derived from snowmelt runoff in ways consistent with model‐based projections of 21st‐Century streamflow. Annual and monthly changes in streamflow volume and surface climate variables on the Upper Rio Grande, near its headwaters in southern Colorado, are assessed for water years 1958–2015. Results indicate winter and spring season temperatures in the basin have increased significantly, April 1 snow water equivalent (SWE) has decreased by approximately 25%, and streamflow has declined slightly in the April–July snowmelt runoff season. Small increases in precipitation have reduced the impact of declining snowpack on trends in streamflow. Changes in the snowpack–runoff relationship are noticeable in hydrographs of mean monthly streamflow, but are most apparent in the changing ratios of precipitation (rain + snow, and SWE) to streamflow and in the declining fraction of runoff attributable to snowpack or winter precipitation. The observed changes provide observational confirmation for model projections of decreasing runoff attributable to snowpack, and demonstrate the decreasing utility of snowpack for predicting subsequent streamflow on a seasonal basis in the Upper Rio Grande Basin.     

Augmenting Watershed Model Calibration with Incorporation of Ancillary Data Sources and Qualitative Soft Data Sources

Watershed simulation models such as the Soil & Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) can be calibrated using “hard data” such as temporal streamflow observations; however, users may find upon examination of model outputs, that the calibrated models may not reflect actual watershed behavior. Thus, it is often advantageous to use “soft data” (i.e., qualitative knowledge such as expected denitrification rates that observed time series do not typically exist) to ensure that the calibrated model is representative of the real world. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of coupling SWAT‐Check (a post‐evaluation framework for SWAT outputs) and IPEAT‐SD (Integrated Parameter Estimation and Uncertainty Analysis Tool‐Soft & hard Data evaluation) to constrain the bounds of soft data during SWAT auto‐calibration. IPEAT‐SD integrates 59 soft data variables to ensure SWAT does not violate physical processes known to occur in watersheds. IPEAT‐SD was evaluated for two case studies where soft data such as denitrification rate, nitrate attributed from subsurface flow to total discharge ratio, and total sediment loading were used to conduct model calibration. Results indicated that SWAT model outputs may not satisfy reasonable soft data responses without providing pre‐defined bounds. IPEAT‐SD provides an efficient and rigorous framework for users to conduct future studies while considering both soft data and traditional hard information measures in watershed modeling.     

Assessing the Impact of Areal Precipitation Input on Streamflow Simulations Using the SWAT Model1

Masih Ilyas, Shreedhar Maskey, Stefan Uhlenbrook, and Vladimir Smakhtin, 2011. Assessing the Impact of Areal Precipitation Input on Streamflow Simulations Using the SWAT Model. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 47(1):179‐195. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752‐1688.2010.00502.x Abstract: Reduction of input uncertainty is a challenge in hydrological modeling. The widely used model Soil Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) uses the data of a precipitation gauge nearest to the centroid of each subcatchment as an input for that subcatchment. This may not represent overall catchment precipitation conditions well. This paper suggests an alternative – using areal precipitation obtained through interpolation. The effectiveness of this alternative is evaluated by comparing its simulations with those based on the standard SWAT precipitation input procedure. The model is applied to mountainous semiarid catchments in the Karkheh River basin, Iran. The model performance is evaluated at daily, monthly, and annual scales by using a number of performance indicators at 15 streamflow gauging stations each draining an area in the range of 590‐42,620 km². The comparison suggests that the use of areal precipitation improves model performance particularly in small subcatchments in the range of 600‐1,600 km². The modified areal precipitation input results in increased reliability of simulated streamflows in the areas of low rain gauge density. Both precipitation input methods result in reasonably good simulations for larger catchments (over 5,000 km²). The use of areal precipitation input improves the accuracy of simulated streamflows with spatial resolution and density of rain gauges having significant impact on results.     

Validation of Satellite Precipitation Adjustment Methodology From Seven Basins in the Continental United States1

Tobin, Kenneth J. and Marvin E. Bennett, 2012. Validation of Satellite Precipitation Adjustment Methodology From Seven Basins in the Continental United States. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 48(2): 221‐234. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752‐1688.2011.00604.x Abstract: The precipitation science community has expressed concern regarding the ability of satellite‐based precipitation products to accurately capture rainfall values over land. There has been some work that has focused on addressing the deficiencies of satellite precipitation products, particularly on the adjustment of bias. This article outlines a methodology that adjusts satellite products utilizing ground‐based precipitation data. The approach is not a simple bias adjustment, but is a three‐step process that transforms a satellite product based on a ground‐based precipitation product (NEXRAD‐derived Multisensor Precipitation Estimator [MPE] product or rain‐gauge data). The developed methodology was successfully applied to seven moderate‐to‐large sized watersheds from continental United States (CONUS) and northern Mexico over a spectrum of climatic regimes ranging from dry to humid settings. Methodology validation is based on comparison of observed and simulated streamflow generated with SWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) model using unadjusted and adjusted precipitation products as input. Streamflow comparison is based on mass balance error and Nash‐Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient. Finally, the contribution of how adjustment to correct misses, false alarms, and bias impacts adjusted datasets and the potential impact that the adjustment methodology can have on hydrological applications such as water resource monitoring and flood prediction are explored.     

Hydrologic Calibration and Validation of SWAT in a Snow‐Dominated Rocky Mountain Watershed,Montana, U.S.A.1

Abstract: The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) has been applied successfully in temperate environments but little is known about its performance in the snow‐dominated, forested, mountainous watersheds that provide much of the water supply in western North America. To address this knowledge gap, we configured SWAT to simulate the streamflow of Tenderfoot Creek (TCSWAT). Located in central Montana, TCSWAT represents a high‐elevation watershed with ～85% coniferous forest cover where more than 70% of the annual precipitation falls as snow, and runoff comes primarily from spring snowmelt. Model calibration using four years of measured daily streamflow, temperature, and precipitation data resulted in a relative error (RE) of 2% for annual water yield estimates, and mean paired deviations (Dv) of 36 and 31% and Nash‐Sutcliffe (NS) efficiencies of 0.90 and 0.86 for monthly and daily streamflow, respectively. Model validation was conducted using an additional four years of data and the performance was similar to the calibration period, with RE of 4% for annual water yields, Dv of 43% and 32%, and NS efficiencies of 0.90 and 0.76 for monthly and daily streamflow, respectively. An objective, regression‐based model invalidation procedure also indicated that the model was validated for the overall simulation period. Seasonally, SWAT performed well during the spring and early summer snowmelt runoff period, but was a poor predictor of late summer and winter base flow. The calibrated model was most sensitive to snowmelt parameters, followed in decreasing order of influence by the surface runoff lag, ground water, soil, and SCS Curve Number parameter sets. Model sensitivity to the surface runoff lag parameter reflected the influence of frozen soils on runoff processes. Results indicated that SWAT can provide reasonable predictions of annual, monthly, and daily streamflow from forested montane watersheds, but further model refinements could improve representation of snowmelt runoff processes and performance during the base flow period in this environment.     

Hydrologic Model Framework for Water Resources Planning in the Santa Cruz River,Southern Arizona1

Abstract: The authors develop a model framework that includes a set of hydrologic modules as a water resources management and planning tool for the upper Santa Cruz River near the Mexican border, Southern Arizona. The modules consist of: (1) stochastic generation of hourly precipitation scenarios that maintain the characteristics and variability of a 45‐year hourly precipitation record from a nearby rain gauge; (2) conceptual transformation of generated precipitation into daily streamflow using varied infiltration rates and estimates of the basin antecedent moisture conditions; and (3) surface‐water to ground‐water interaction for four downstream microbasins that accounts for alluvial ground‐water recharge, and ET and pumping losses. To maintain the large inter‐annual variability of streamflow as prevails in Southern Arizona, the model framework is constructed to produce three types of seasonal winter and summer categories of streamflow (i.e., wet, medium, or dry). Long‐term (i.e., 100 years) realizations (ensembles) are generated by the above described model framework that reflects two different regimes of inter annual variability. The first regime is that of the historic streamflow gauge record. The second regime is that of the tree ring reconstructed precipitation, which was derived for the study location. Generated flow ensembles for these two regimes are used to evaluate the risk that the regional four ground‐water microbasins decline below a preset storage threshold under different operational water utilization scenarios.     

Impact of Watershed Subdivision and Soil Data Resolution on SWAT Model Calibration and Parameter Uncertainty1

Abstract: Impact of watershed subdivision and soil data resolution on Soil Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model calibration and parameter uncertainty is investigated by creating 24 different watershed model configurations for two study areas in northern Indiana. SWAT autocalibration tool is used to calibrate 14 parameters for simulating seven years of daily streamflow records. Calibrated parameter sets are found to be different for all 24 watershed configurations, however in terms of calibrated model output, their effect is minimal. In some cases, autocalibration is followed by manual calibration to correct for low flows, which were underestimated during autocalibration. In addition to normal validation using four years of streamflow data for each calibrated parameter set, cross‐validation (using a calibrated parameter set from one model configuration to validate observations using another configuration) is performed to investigate the effect of different model configurations on streamflow prediction. Results show that streamflow output during cross‐validation is not affected, thus highlighting the non‐unique nature of calibrated parameters in hydrologic modeling. Finally, parameter uncertainty is investigated by extracting good parameter sets during the autocalibration process. Parameter uncertainty analysis suggests that significant parameters show very narrow range of uncertainty across different watershed configurations compared with nonsignificant parameters. Results from recalibration of some configurations using only six significant parameters were comparable to that from calibration using 14 parameters, suggesting that including fewer significant parameters could reduce the uncertainty arising from model parameters, and also expedite the calibration process.     

Long‐Term High‐Resolution Radar Rainfall Fields for Urban Hydrology

Accurate records of high‐resolution rainfall fields are essential in urban hydrology, and are lacking in many areas. We develop a high‐resolution (15 min, 1 km²) radar rainfall data set for Charlotte, North Carolina during the 2001‐2010 period using the Hydro‐NEXRAD system with radar reflectivity from the National Weather Service Weather Surveillance Radar 1988 Doppler weather radar located in Greer, South Carolina. A dense network of 71 rain gages is used for estimating and correcting radar rainfall biases. Radar rainfall estimates with daily mean field bias (MFB) correction accurately capture the spatial and temporal structure of extreme rainfall, but bias correction at finer timescales can improve cold‐season and tropical cyclone rainfall estimates. Approximately 25 rain gages are sufficient to estimate daily MFB over an area of at least 2,500 km², suggesting that robust bias correction is feasible in many urban areas. Conditional (rain‐rate dependent) bias can be removed, but at the expense of other performance criteria such as mean square error. Hydro‐NEXRAD radar rainfall estimates are also compared with the coarser resolution (hourly, 16 km²) Stage IV operational rainfall product. Stage IV is adequate for flood water balance studies but is insufficient for applications such as urban flood modeling, in which the temporal and spatial scales of relevant hydrologic processes are short. We recommend the increased use of high‐resolution radar rainfall fields in urban hydrology.     

Evaluation of Satellite‐Derived Rainfall Data for Multiple Physio‐Climatic Regions in the Santiago River Basin,Mexico

Assessment of water resources requires reliable rainfall data, and rain gauge networks may not provide adequate spatial representation due to limited point measurements. The Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) provides rainfall data at global scale, and has been used with good results. However, TRMM data are an indirect measurement of rainfall, and therefore must be validated for its proper use. In this work, a validation scheme was designed and implemented to compare the TRMM Version 7 (V7) monthly rainfall product at different time frames with data measured in two hydrologic subregions of the Santiago River Basin (SRB) in Mexico: Río Alto Santiago and Río Bajo Santiago (RBS). Additionally, three physio‐climatic regions provide an assessment of the interplay of topography, distance from coastal regions, and seasonal weather patterns on the correspondence between both datasets. The TRMM V7 rainfall product exhibited good agreement with the rain gauge data particularly for the RBS and for the whole SRB during wettest summer and autumn seasons. However, strong regional dependence was observed due to differences in climate and topography. Overall, in spite of some noted underestimations, the monthly TRMM V7 rainfall product was found to provide useful information that can be used to complement limited monitoring as is the case of RBS. An improved combined rainfall product could be generated and thus gaining the most benefits from both data sources.     

COMPARISON OF PROCESS‐BASED AND ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK APPROACHES FOR STREAMFLOW MODELING IN AN AGRICULTURAL WATERSHED1

ABSTRACT: The performance of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) and artificial neural network (ANN) models in simulating hydrologic response was assessed in an agricultural watershed in southeastern Pennsylvania. All of the performance evaluation measures including Nash‐Sutcliffe coefficient of efficiency (E) and coefficient of determination (R²) suggest that the ANN monthly predictions were closer to the observed flows than the monthly predictions from the SWAT model. More specifically, monthly streamflow E and R² were 0.54 and 0.57, respectively, for the SWAT model calibration period, and 0.71 and 0.75, respectively, for the ANN model training period. For the validation period, these values were ?0.17 and 0.34 for the SWAT and 0.43 and 0.45 for the ANN model. SWAT model performance was affected by snowmelt events during winter months and by the model's inability to adequately simulate base flows. Even though this and other studies using ANN models suggest that these models provide a viable alternative approach for hydrologic and water quality modeling, ANN models in their current form are not spatially distributed watershed modeling systems. However, considering the promising performance of the simple ANN model, this study suggests that the ANN approach warrants further development to explicitly address the spatial distribution of hydrologic/water quality processes within watersheds.     

Constraining SWAT Calibration with Remotely Sensed Evapotranspiration Data

Historically, many watershed studies have been based on using the streamflow flux, typically from a single gauge at the basin's outlet, to support calibration. In this setting, there is great potential for equifinality of parameters during the optimization process, especially for parameters that are not directly related to streamflow. Therefore, some of the optimal parameter values achieved during the autocalibration process may be physically unrealistic. In recent decades a vast array of data from land surface models and remote sensing platforms can help to constrain hydrologic fluxes such as evapotranspiration (ET). While the spatial resolution of these ancillary datasets varies, the continuous spatial coverage of these gridded datasets provides flux measurements across the entire basin, in stark contrast to point‐based streamflow data. This study uses Global Land Evaporation: the Amsterdam Model data to constrain Soil and Water Assessment Tool parameter values associated with ET to a more physically realistic range. The study area is the Little Washita River Experimental Watershed, in southern Oklahoma. Traditional objective metrics such as the Nash‐Sutcliffe coefficients record no performance improvement after application of this method. However, there is a dramatic increase in the number of days with receding flow where simulations match observed streamflow.     

Implications of Conceptual Channel Representation on SWAT Streamflow and Sediment Modeling

Hydrologic modeling outputs are influenced by how a watershed system is represented. Channel routing is a typical example of the mathematical conceptualization of watershed landscape and processes in hydrologic modeling. We investigated the sensitivity of accuracy, equifinality, and uncertainty of Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) modeling to channel dimensions to demonstrate how a conceptual representation of a watershed system affects streamflow and sediment modeling. Results showed the amount of uncertainty and equifinality strongly responded to channel dimensions. On the other hand, the model performance did not significantly vary with the changes in the channel representation due to the degree of freedom allowed by the conceptual nature of hydrologic modeling in the parameter calibration. Such findings demonstrated good modeling performance statistics do not necessarily mean small output uncertainty, and partial improvements in the watershed representation may neither increase modeling accuracy nor reduce uncertainty. We also showed the equifinality and uncertainty of hydrologic modeling are case‐dependent rather than specific to models or regions, suggesting great caution should be used when attempting to transfer uncertainty analysis results to other modeling studies, especially for ungauged watersheds. Editor's note: This paper is part of the featured series on SWAT Applications for Emerging Hydrologic and Water Quality Challenges. See the February 2017 issue for the introduction and background to the series.     

Comparison of the Performance of Statistical Models in Forecasting Monthly Total Dissolved Solids in the Rio Grande1

Abudu, S., J.P. King, Z. Sheng, 2011. Comparison of the Performance of Statistical Models in Forecasting Monthly Total Dissolved Solids in the Rio Grande. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 48(1): 10‐23. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752‐1688.2011.00587.x Abstract: This paper presents the application of autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA), transfer function‐noise (TFN), and artificial neural networks (ANNs) modeling approaches in forecasting monthly total dissolved solids (TDS) of water in the Rio Grande at El Paso, Texas. Predictability analysis was performed between the precipitation, temperature, streamflow rates at the site, releases from upstream reservoirs, and monthly TDS using cross‐correlation statistical tests. The chi‐square test results indicated that the average monthly temperature and precipitation did not show significant predictability on monthly TDS series. The performances of one‐ to three‐month‐ahead model forecasts for the testing period of 1984‐1994 showed that the TFN model that incorporated the streamflow rates at the site and Caballo Reservoir release improved monthly TDS forecasts slightly better than the ARIMA models. Except for one‐month‐ahead forecasts, the ANN models using the streamflow rates at the site as inputs resulted in no significant improvements over the TFN models at two‐month‐ahead and three‐month‐ahead forecasts. For three‐month‐ahead forecasts, the simple ARIMA showed similar performance compared to all other models. The results of this study suggested that simple deseasonalized ARIMA models could be used in one‐ to three‐month‐ahead TDS forecasting at the study site with a simple, explicit model structure and similar model performance as the TFN and ANN models for better water management in the Basin.     

Hydrologic and atrazine simulation of the Cedar Creek Watershed using the SWAT model

One of the major factors contributing to surface water contamination in agricultural areas is the use of pesticides. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) is a hydrologic model capable of simulating the fate and transport of pesticides in an agricultural watershed. The SWAT model was used in this study to estimate stream flow and atrazine (2-chloro-4-(ethylamino)-6-(isopropylamino)-s-triazine) losses to surface water in the Cedar Creek Watershed (CCW) within the St. Joseph River Basin in northeastern Indiana. Model calibration and validation periods consisted of five and two year periods, respectively. The National Agricultural Statistics Survey (NASS) 2001 land cover classification and the Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database were used as model input data layers. Data from the St. Joseph River Watershed Initiative and the Soil and Water Conservation Districts of Allen, Dekalb, and Noble counties were used to represent agricultural practices in the watershed which included the type of crops grown, tillage practices, fertilizer, and pesticide application rates. Model results were evaluated based on efficiency coefficient values, standard statistical measures, and visual inspection of the measured and simulated hydrographs. The Nash and Sutcliffe model efficiency coefficients (E(NS)) for monthly and daily stream flow calibration and validation ranged from 0.51 to 0.66. The E(NS) values for atrazine calibration and validation ranged from 0.43 to 0.59. All E(NS) values were within the range of acceptable model performance standards. The results of this study indicate that the model is an effective tool in capturing the dynamics of stream flow and atrazine concentrations on a large-scale agricultural watershed in the midwestern USA.     

PRISM vs. CFSR Precipitation Data Effects on Calibration and Validation of SWAT Models

Precipitation is one of the most important drivers in watershed models. Our objective was to compare two sources of interpolated precipitation data in terms of their effect on calibration and validation of two Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) models. One model was a suburban watershed in metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia. The precipitation sources were Parameter‐elevation Relationships on Independent Slopes Model (PRISM) data on a 4‐km grid and climate forecast system reanalysis (CFSR) data on a 38‐km grid. The PRISM data resulted in a better fit to the calibration data (Nash Sutcliffe efficiency [NSE] = 0.64, Kling‐Gupta efficiency [KGE] = 0.74, p‐factor = 0.84, and r‐factor = 0.43) than the CFSR data (NSE = 0.47, KGE = 0.53, p‐factor = 0.67, and r‐factor = 0.39). Validation results were similar. Sensitive parameters were similar in both the PRISM and CFSR models, but fitted values indicated more rapid groundwater flow to the streams with the PRISM data. The same comparison was made in the Big Creek watershed located approximately 1,000 km away, in central Louisiana. Results were similar with a more responsive groundwater system indicating PRISM data may produce better predictions of streamflow because of a more accurate estimate of rainfall within a watershed or because of a denser grid. Our study implies PRISM is providing a better estimate than CFSR of precipitation within a watershed when rain gauge data are not available, resulting in more accurate simulations of streamflows at the watershed outlet. Editor's note: This paper is part of the featured series on SWAT Applications for Emerging Hydrologic and Water Quality Challenges. See the February 2017 issue for the introduction and background to the series.