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.     

Approaches to Evaluate Water Quality Model Parameter Uncertainty for Adaptive TMDL Implementation1

Abstract: The National Research Council recommended Adaptive Total Maximum Daily Load implementation with the recognition that the predictive uncertainty of water quality models can be high. Quantifying predictive uncertainty provides important information for model selection and decision‐making. We review five methods that have been used with water quality models to evaluate model parameter and predictive uncertainty. These methods (1) Regionalized Sensitivity Analysis, (2) Generalized Likelihood Uncertainty Estimation, (3) Bayesian Monte Carlo, (4) Importance Sampling, and (5) Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) are based on similar concepts; their development over time was facilitated by the increasing availability of fast, cheap computers. Using a Streeter‐Phelps model as an example we show that, applied consistently, these methods give compatible results. Thus, all of these methods can, in principle, provide useful sets of parameter values that can be used to evaluate model predictive uncertainty, though, in practice, some are quickly limited by the “curse of dimensionality” or may have difficulty evaluating irregularly shaped parameter spaces. Adaptive implementation invites model updating, as new data become available reflecting water‐body responses to pollutant load reductions, and a Bayesian approach using MCMC is particularly handy for that task.