EFFECTS OF STATSGO AND SSURGO AS INPUTS ON SWAT MODEL'S SNOWMELT SIMULATION1

ABSTRACT: Soil data comprise a basic input of SWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) for a watershed application. For watersheds where site specific soil data are unavailable, the two U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil databases, the State Soil Geographic (STATSGO) and Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) databases, may be the best alternatives. Although it has been noted that SWAT models using the STATSGO and SSURGO data may give different simulation results for water, sediment, and agricultural chemical yields, information is scarce on the effects of using these two databases in predicting streamflows that are predominantly generated from melting snow in spring. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of using STATSGO versus SSURGO as an input for the SWAT model's simulation of the streamflows in the upper 45 percent of the Elm River watershed in eastern North Dakota. Designating the model as SWAT‐STATSGO when the STATSGO data were used and SWAT‐SSURGO when the SSURGO data were used, SWAT‐STATSGO and SWAT‐SSURGO were separately calibrated and validated using the observed daily streamflows. The results indicated that SWAT‐SSURGO provided an overall better prediction of the discharges than SWAT‐STATSGO, although both did a good and comparable job of predicting the high streamflows. However, SWAT‐STATSGO predicted the low streamflows more accurately and had a slightly better performance during the validation period. In addition, the discrepancies between the discharges predicted by these two SWAT models tended to be larger at upstream locations than at those farther downstream within the study area.     

SWAT‐LUT: A Desktop Graphical User Interface for Updating Land Use in SWAT

Long‐term simulations of agricultural watersheds have often been done assuming constant land use over time, but this is not a realistic assumption for many agricultural regions. This paper presents the soil and water assessment tool (SWAT)‐Landuse Update Tool (LUT), a standalone, user‐friendly desktop‐based tool for updating land use in the SWAT model that allows users to process multi‐year land use data. SWAT‐LUT is compatible with several SWAT model interfaces, provides users with several options to easily prepare and incorporate land use changes (LUCs) over a simulation period, and allows users to incorporate past or emerging land use categories. Incorporation of LUCs is expected to provide realistic model parameterization and scenario simulations. SWAT‐LUT is a public domain interface written in Python programming language. Two applications at the Fort Cobb Reservoir Experimental Watershed located in Oklahoma and pertinent results are provided to demonstrate its use. Incorporating LUCs related to implementation of recommended conservation practices over the years reduced discharge, evapotranspiration, sediment, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus loads by 59%, 9%, 68%, 53%, and 88%, respectively. The user’s manual is included in this article as Supporting Information. The SWAT‐LUT executable file and an example SWAT project with three land use rasters and the user’s manual are available at the United States Department of Agriculture‐Agricultural Research Service Grazinglands Research Laboratory website under Software. Editor’s note : This paper is part of the featured series on Optimizing Ogallala Aquifer Water Use to Sustain Food Systems. See the February 2019 issue for the introduction and background to the series.     

SWATMOD‐Prep: Graphical User Interface for Preparing Coupled SWAT‐MODFLOW Simulations

This article presents SWATMOD‐Prep, a graphical user interface that couples a SWAT watershed model with a MODFLOW groundwater flow model. The interface is based on a recently published SWAT‐MODFLOW code that couples the models via mapping schemes. The spatial layout of SWATMOD‐Prep guides the user through the process of importing shape files (sub‐basins, hydrologic response units [HRUs], river network) from an existing SWAT model, creating a grid, performing necessary geo‐processing operations to link the models, writing out SWAT‐MODFLOW files, and running the simulation. The option of creating a new single‐layer MODFLOW model for near‐surface alluvial aquifers is available, with the user prompted to provide groundwater surface elevation (through a digital elevation model), aquifer thickness, and necessary aquifer parameter values. The option of simulating nitrate transport in the aquifer also is available, using the reactive transport model RT3D. The interface is in the public domain. It is programmed in Python, with various software packages used for geo‐processing operations (e.g., selection, intersection of rasters) and inputting/outputting data, and is written for Windows. The use of SWATMOD‐Prep is demonstrated for the Little River Experimental Watershed, Georgia. SWATMOD‐Prep and SWAT‐MODFLOW executables are available with an accompanying user's manual at: http://swat.tamu.edu/software/swat-modflow/ . The user's manual also accompanies this article as Supporting Information.     

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS,CALIBRATION, AND VALIDATIONS FOR A MULTISITE AND MULTIVARIABLE SWAT MODEL1

The ability of a watershed model to mimic specified watershed processes is assessed through the calibration and validation process. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) watershed model was implemented in the Beaver Reservoir Watershed of Northwest Arkansas. The objectives were to: (1) provide detailed information on calibrating and applying a multisite and multivariable SWAT model; (2) conduct sensitivity analysis; and (3) perform calibration and validation at three different sites for flow, sediment, total phosphorus (TP), and nitrate‐nitrogen (NO₃‐N) plus nitrite‐nitrogen (NO₂‐N). Relative sensitivity analysis was conducted to identify parameters that most influenced predicted flow, sediment, and nutrient model outputs. A multi objective function was defined that consisted of optimizing three statistics: percent relative error (RE), Nash‐Sutcliffe Coefficient (R_NS²), and coefficient of determination (R²). This function was used to successfully calibrate and validate a SWAT model of Beaver Reservoir Watershed at multi‐sites while considering multivariables. Calibration and validation of the model is a key factor in reducing uncertainty and increasing user confidence in its predictive abilities, which makes the application of the model effective. Information on calibration and validation of multisite, multivariable SWAT models has been provided to assist watershed modelers in developing their models to achieve watershed management goals.     

HYDROLOGIC PARAMETERIZATION OF WATERSHEDS FOR RUNOFF PREDICTION USING SWAT1

ABSTRACT: The use of continuous time, distributed parameter hydrologic models like SWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool) has opened several opportunities to improve watershed modeling accuracy. However, it has also placed a heavy burden on users with respect to the amount of work involved in parameterizing the watershed in general and in adequately representing the spatial variability of the watershed in particular. Recent developments in Geographical Information Systems (GIS) have alleviated some of the difficulties associated with managing spatial data. However, the user must still choose among various parameterization approaches that are available within the model. This paper describes the important parameterization issues involved when modeling watershed hydrology for runoff prediction using SWAT with emphasis on how to improve model performance without resorting to tedious and arbitrary parameter by parameter calibration. Synthetic and actual watersheds in Indiana and Mississippi were used to illustrate the sensitivity of runoff prediction to spatial variability, watershed decomposition, and spatial and temporal adjustment of curve numbers and return flow contribution. SWAT was also used to predict stream runoff from actual watersheds in Indiana that have extensive subsurface drainage. The results of this study provide useful information for improving SWAT performance in terms of stream runoff prediction in a manner that is particularly useful for modeling ungaged watersheds wherein observed data for calibration is not available.     

Runoff Simulation of the Headwaters of the Yellow River Using The SWAT Model With Three Snowmelt Algorithms1

Abstract: The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model combined with different snowmelt algorithms was evaluated for runoff simulation of an 114,345 km² mountainous river basin (the headwaters of the Yellow River), where snowmelt is a significant process. The three snowmelt algorithms incorporated into SWAT were as follows: (1) the temperature‐index, (2) the temperature‐index plus elevation band, and (3) the energy budget based SNOW17. The SNOW17 is more complex than the temperature‐based snowmelt algorithms, and requires more detailed meteorological and topographical inputs. In order to apply the SNOW17 in the SWAT framework, SWAT was modified to operate at the pixel scale rather than the normal Hydrologic Response Unit scale. The three snowmelt algorithms were evaluated under two parameter scenarios, the default and the calibrated parameters scenarios. Under the default parameters scenario, the parameter values were determined based on a review of the current literature. The purpose of this type of evaluation was to assess the applicability of SWAT in ungauged basins, where there is little observed data available for calibration. Under the calibrated parameters scenario, the parameters were calibrated using an automatic calibration program, the Shuffled Complex Evolution (SCE‐UA). The purpose of this type of evaluation was to assess the applicability of SWAT in gauged basins. Two time periods (1975‐1985 and 1986‐1990) of monthly runoff data were used in this study to evaluate the performance of SWAT with different snowmelt algorithms. Under the default parameters scenario, the SWAT model with complex energy budget based SNOW17 performed the best for both time periods. Under the calibrated parameters scenario, the parameters were calibrated using monthly runoff from 1975‐1985 and validated using monthly runoff from 1986‐1990. After parameter calibration, the performance of SWAT with the three snowmelt algorithms was improved from the default parameters scenario. Further, the SWAT model with temperature‐index plus elevation band performed as well as the SWAT model with SNOW17. The SWAT model with temperature‐index algorithm performed the poorest for both time periods under both scenarios. Therefore, it is suggested that the SNOW17 model be used for modeling ungauged basins; however, for gauged basins, the SNOW17 and simple temperature‐index plus elevation band models could provide almost equally good runoff simulation results.     

Testing of the Modified Streambank Erosion and Instream Phosphorus Routines for the SWAT Model

In some watersheds, streambanks are a source of two major pollutants, phosphorus (P) and sediment. P originating from both uplands and streambanks can be transported and stored indefinitely on floodplains, streambanks, and in closed depressions near the stream. The objectives of this study were to (1) test the modified streambank erosion and instream P routines for the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model in the Barren Fork Creek watershed in northeast Oklahoma, (2) predict P in the watershed with and without streambank‐derived P, and (3) determine the significance of streambank erosion P relative to overland P sources. Measured streambank and channel parameters were incorporated into a flow‐calibrated SWAT model and used to estimate streambank erosion and P for the Barren Fork Creek using modified streambank erosion and instream P routines. The predicted reach‐weighted streambank erosion was 40 kg/m vs. the measured 42 kg/m. Streambank erosion contributed 47% of the total P to the Barren Fork Creek and improved P predictions compared to observed data, especially during the high‐flow events. Of the total P entering the stream system, approximately 65% was removed via the watershed outlet and 35% was stored in the floodplain and stream system. This study successfully applied the SWAT model's modified streambank erosion and instream P routines and demonstrated that streambank‐derived P can improve P modeling at the watershed scale. 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.     

Development of a Quantitative Pasture Phosphorus Management Tool Using the SWAT Model1

Abstract: Assessment tools to evaluate phosphorus loss from agricultural lands allow conservation planners to evaluate the impact of management decisions on water quality. Available tools to predict phosphorus loss from agricultural fields are either: (1) qualitative indices with limited applicability to address offsite water quality standards, or (2) models which are prohibitively complex for application by most conservation planners. The purpose of this research was to develop a simple interface for a comprehensive hydrologic/water quality model to allow its usage by farmers and conservation planners. The Pasture Phosphorus Management (PPM) Calculator was developed to predict average annual phosphorus (P) losses from pastures under a variety of field conditions and management options. PPM Calculator is a vastly simplified interface for the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model that requires no knowledge of SWAT by the user. PPM Calculator was validated using 33 months of data on four pasture fields in northwestern Arkansas. This tool has been extensively applied in the Lake Eucha/Spavinaw Basin in northeastern Oklahoma and northwestern Arkansas. PPM Calculator allows conservation planners to take advantage of the predictive capacity of a comprehensive hydrologic water quality model typically reserved for use by hydrologists and engineers. This research demonstrates the applicability of existing water quality models in the development of user friendly P management tools.     

A Simple Process‐Based Snowmelt Routine to Model Spatially Distributed Snow Depth and Snowmelt in the SWAT Model1

Abstract: We present a method to integrate a process‐based (PB) snowmelt model that requires only daily temperature and elevation information into the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model. The model predicts the spatiotemporal snowpack distribution without adding additional complexity, and in fact reduces the number of calibrated parameters. To demonstrate the utility of the PB model, we calibrate the PB and temperature‐index (TI) SWAT models to optimize agreement with stream discharge on a 46‐km² watershed in northwestern Idaho, United States, for 10 individual years and use the calibrated parameters for the year with the best agreement to run the model for 15 remaining years. Stream discharge predictions by the PB and TI model were similar, although the PB model simulated snowmelt more accurately than the TI model for the remaining 15‐year period. Spatial snow distributions predicted by the PB model better matched observations from LandSat imagery and a SNOTEL station. Results for this watershed show that including PB snowmelt in watershed models is feasible, and calibration of TI‐based watershed models against discharge can incorrectly predict snow cover.     

Development of a SWAT Patch for Better Estimation of Sediment Yield in Steep Sloping Watersheds1

Abstract: The watershed scale Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model divides watersheds into smaller subwatersheds for simulation of rainfall‐runoff and sediment loading at the field level and routing through stream networks. Typically, the SWAT model first needs to be calibrated and validated for accurate estimation through adjustment of sensitive input parameters (i.e., Curve Number values, USLE P, slope and slope‐length, and so on). However, in some instances, SWAT‐simulated results are greatly affected by the watershed delineation and Digital Elevation Models (DEM) cell size. In this study, the SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II was developed for steep sloping watersheds, and its performance was evaluated for various threshold values and DEM cell size scenarios when delineating subwatersheds using the SWAT model. The SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II was developed using the ArcView GIS Avenue program and Spatial Analyst libraries. The SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II improves upon the SWAT ArcView GIS Patch I because it reflects the topographic factor in calculating the field slope‐length of Hydrologic Response Units in the SWAT model. The simulated sediment value for 321 subwatersheds (watershed delineation threshold value of 25 ha) is greater than that for 43 subwatersheds (watershed delineation threshold value of 200 ha) by 201% without applying the SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II. However, when the SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II was applied, the difference in simulated sediment yield decreases for the same scenario (i.e., difference in simulated sediment with 321 subwatersheds and 43 subwatersheds) was 12%. The simulated sediment value for DEM cell size of 50 m is greater than that for DEM cell size of 10 m by 19.8% without the SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II. However, the difference becomes smaller (3.4% difference) between 50 and 10 m with the SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II for the DEM scenarios. As shown in this study, the SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II can reduce differences in simulated sediment values for various watershed delineation and DEM cell size scenarios. Without the SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II, variations in the SWAT‐simulated results using various watershed delineation and DEM cell size scenarios could be greater than those from input parameter calibration. Thus, the results obtained in this study show that the SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II should be used when simulating hydrology and sediment yield for steep sloping watersheds (especially if average slope of the subwatershed is >25%) for more accurate simulation of hydrology and sediment using the SWAT model. The SWAT ArcView GIS Patch II is available at http://www.EnvSys.co.kr/~swat for free download.     

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.     

Simulation of Daily Flow Pathways,Tile‐Drain Nitrate Concentrations,and Soil‐Nitrogen Dynamics Using SWAT

Tile drainage significantly alters flow and nutrient pathways and reliable simulation at this scale is needed for effective planning of nutrient reduction strategies. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) has been widely utilized for prediction of flow and nutrient loads, but few applications have evaluated the model's ability to simulate pathway‐specific flow components or nitrate‐nitrogen (NO₃‐N) concentrations in tile‐drained watersheds at the daily time step. The objectives of this study were to develop and calibrate SWAT models for small, tile‐drained watersheds, evaluate model performance for simulation of flow components and NO₃‐N concentration at daily intervals, and evaluate simulated soil‐nitrogen dynamics. Model evaluation revealed that it is possible to meet accepted performance criteria for simulation of monthly total flow, subsurface flow (SSF), and NO₃‐N loads while obtaining daily surface runoff (SURQ), SSF, and NO₃‐N concentrations that are not satisfactory. This limits model utility for simulating best management practices (BMPs) and compliance with water quality standards. Although SWAT simulates the soil N‐cycle and most predicted fluxes were within ranges reported in agronomic studies, improvements to algorithms for soil‐N processes are needed. Variability in N fluxes is extreme and better parameterization and constraint, through use of more detailed agronomic data, would also improve NO₃‐N simulation in SWAT. 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.     

Approximating SWAT Model Using Artificial Neural Network and Support Vector Machine1

Abstract: With the popularity of complex, physically based hydrologic models, the time consumed for running these models is increasing substantially. Using surrogate models to approximate the computationally intensive models is a promising method to save huge amounts of time for parameter estimation. In this study, two learning machines [Artificial Neural Network (ANN) and support vector machine (SVM)] were evaluated and compared for approximating the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model. These two learning machines were tested in two watersheds (Little River Experimental Watershed in Georgia and Mahatango Creek Experimental Watershed in Pennsylvania). The results show that SVM in general exhibited better generalization ability than ANN. In order to effectively and efficiently apply SVM to approximate SWAT, the effect of cross‐validation schemes, parameter dimensions, and training sample sizes on the performance of SVM was evaluated and discussed. It is suggested that 3‐fold cross‐validation is adequate for training the SVM model, and reducing the parameter dimension through determining the parameter values from field data and the sensitivity analysis is an effective means of improving the performance of SVM. As far as the training sample size, it is difficult to determine the appropriate number of samples for training SVM based on the test results obtained in this study. Simple examples were used to illustrate the potential applicability of combining the SVM model with uncertainty analysis algorithm to save efforts for parameter uncertainty of SWAT. In the future, evaluating the applicability of SVM for approximating SWAT in other watersheds and combining SVM with different parameter uncertainty analysis algorithms and evolutionary optimization algorithms deserve further research.     

HYDROLOGICAL MODELING OF THE IROQUOIS RIVER WATERSHED USING HSPF AND SWAT1

ABSTRACT: The performance of two popular watershed scale simulation models — HSPF and SWAT — were evaluated for simulating the hydrology of the 5,568 km² Iroquois River watershed in Illinois and Indiana. This large, tile drained agricultural watershed provides distinctly different conditions for model comparison in contrast to previous studies. Both models were calibrated for a nine‐year period (1987 through 1995) and verified using an independent 15‐year period (1972 through 1986) by comparing simulated and observed daily, monthly, and annual streamflow. The characteristics of simulated flows from both models are mostly similar to each other and to observed flows, particularly for the calibration results. SWAT predicts flows slightly better than HSPF for the verification period, with the primary advantage being better simulation of low flows. A noticeable difference in the models' hydrologic simulation relates to the estimation of potential evapotranspiration (PET). Comparatively low PET values provided as input to HSPF from the BASINS 3.0 database may be a factor in HSPF's overestimation of low flows. Another factor affecting baseflow simulation is the presence of tile drains in the watershed. HSPF parameters can be adjusted to indirectly account for the faster subsurface flow associated with tile drains, but there is no specific tile drainage component in HSPF as there is in SWAT. Continued comparative studies such as this, under a variety of hydrologic conditions and watershed scales, provide needed guidance to potential users in model selection and application.     

SWATmodel: A Multi‐Operating System,Multi‐Platform SWAT Model Package in R

The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model (Arnold et al., 1998) is a popular watershed management tool. Currently, the SWAT model, actively supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Texas A&M, operates only on Microsoft^® Windows, which hinders modelers that use other operating systems (OS). This technical note introduces the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) distributed “SWATmodel” package which allows SWAT 2005 and 2012 to be widely distributed and run as a linear model‐like function on multiple OS and processor platforms. This allows researchers anywhere in the world using virtually any OS to run SWAT. In addition to simplifying the use of SWAT across computational platforms, the SWATmodel package allows SWAT modelers to utilize the analytical capabilities, statistical libraries, modeling tools, and programming flexibility inherent to R. The software allows watershed modelers to develop a simple hydrological watershed model conceptualization of the SWAT model and to obtain a first approximation of the minimum expected results a more complicated model should deliver. As a proof of concept, we test the SWAT model by initializing and calibrating 314 U.S. Geological Survey stream gages in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and present the results.     

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.     

Using SWAT to Model Streamflow in Two River Basins With Ground and Satellite Precipitation Data1

Abstract: Both ground rain gauge and remotely sensed precipitation (Next Generation Weather Radar – NEXRAD Stage III) data have been used to support spatially distributed hydrological modeling. This study is unique in that it utilizes and compares the performance of National Weather Service (NWS) rain gauge, NEXRAD Stage III, and Tropical Rainfall Measurement Mission (TRMM) 3B42 (Version 6) data for the hydrological modeling of the Middle Nueces River Watershed in South Texas and Middle Rio Grande Watershed in South Texas and northern Mexico. The hydrologic model chosen for this study is the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), which is a comprehensive, physical‐based tool that models watershed hydrology and water quality within stream reaches. Minor adjustments to selected model parameters were applied to make parameter values more realistic based on results from previous studies. In both watersheds, NEXRAD Stage III data yields results with low mass balance error between simulated and actual streamflow (±13%) and high monthly Nash‐Sutcliffe efficiency coefficients (NS > 0.60) for both calibration (July 1, 2003 to December 31, 2006) and validation (2007) periods. In the Middle Rio Grande Watershed NEXRAD Stage III data also yield robust daily results (time averaged over a three‐day period) with NS values of (0.60‐0.88). TRMM 3B42 data generate simulations for the Middle Rio Grande Watershed of variable qualtiy (MBE = +13 to ?16%; NS = 0.38‐0.94; RMSE = 0.07‐0.65), but greatly overestimates streamflow during the calibration period in the Middle Nueces Watershed. During the calibration period use of NWS rain gauge data does not generate acceptable simulations in both watersheds. Significantly, our study is the first to successfully demonstrate the utility of satellite‐estimated precipitation (TRMM 3B42) in supporting hydrologic modeling with SWAT; thereby, potentially extending the realm (between 50°N and 50°S) where remotely sensed precipitation data can support hydrologic modeling outside of regions that have modern, ground‐based radar networks (i.e., much of the third world).     

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.     

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.