Refine
Year of publication
Language
- English (23)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (23)
Keywords
- Soil moisture (3)
- Agricultural field (2)
- Paraíba (2)
- cosmic-ray neutron sensing (2)
- family farming (2)
- global sensitivity analysis (2)
- nested vulnerabilities (2)
- semi-arid regions (2)
- vulnerability indices (2)
- 2.5-D model (1)
Cosmic-Ray neutron sensing (CRS) is a unique approach to measure soil moisture at field scale filling the gap of current methodologies. However, CRS signal is affected by all the hydrogen pools on the land surface and understanding their relative importance plays an important role for the application of the method e.g., validation of remote sensing products and data assimilation. In this study, a soil moisture scaling approach is proposed to estimate directly the correct CRS soil moisture based on the soil moisture profile measured at least in one position within the field. The approach has the advantage to avoid the need to introduce one correction for each hydrogen contribution and to estimate indirectly all the related time-varying hydrogen pools. Based on the data collected in three crop seasons, the scaling approach shows its ability to identify and to quantify the seasonal biomass water equivalent. Additionally, the analysis conducted at sub-daily time resolution is able to quantify the daily vertical redistribution of the water biomass and the rainfall interception, showing promising applications of the CRS method also for these types of measurements. Overall, the study underlines how not only soil moisture but all the specific hydrological processes in the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum should be considered for a proper evaluation of the CRS signal. For this scope, the scaling approach reveals to be a simple and pragmatic analysis that can be easily extended to other experimental sites. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
The present study proposes a General Probabilistic Framework (GPF) for uncertainty and global sensitivity analysis of deterministic models in which, in addition to scalar inputs, non-scalar and correlated inputs can be considered as well. The analysis is conducted with the variance-based approach of Sobol/Saltelli where first and total sensitivity indices are estimated. The results of the framework can be used in a loop for model improvement, parameter estimation or model simplification. The framework is applied to SWAP, a 113 hydrological model for the transport of water, solutes and heat in unsaturated and saturated soils. The sources of uncertainty are grouped in five main classes: model structure (soil discretization), input (weather data), time-varying (crop) parameters, scalar parameters (soil properties) and observations (measured soil moisture). For each source of uncertainty, different realizations are created based on direct monitoring activities. Uncertainty of evapotranspiration, soil moisture in the root zone and bottom fluxes below the root zone are considered in the analysis. The results show that the sources of uncertainty are different for each output considered and it is necessary to consider multiple output variables for a proper assessment of the model. Improvements on the performance of the model can be achieved reducing the uncertainty in the observations, in the soil parameters and in the weather data. Overall, the study shows the capability of the GPF to quantify the relative contribution of the different sources of uncertainty and to identify the priorities required to improve the performance of the model. The proposed framework can be extended to a wide variety of modelling applications, also when direct measurements of model output are not available.
The improvement of process representations in hydrological models is often only driven by the modelers' knowledge and data availability. We present a comprehensive comparison between two hydrological models of different complexity that is developed to support (1) the understanding of the differences between model structures and (2) the identification of the observations needed for model assessment and improvement. The comparison is conducted on both space and time and by aggregating the outputs at different spatiotemporal scales. In the present study, mHM, a process‐based hydrological model, and ParFlow‐CLM, an integrated subsurface‐surface hydrological model, are used. The models are applied in a mesoscale catchment in Germany. Both models agree in the simulated river discharge at the outlet and the surface soil moisture dynamics, lending their supports for some model applications (drought monitoring). Different model sensitivities are, however, found when comparing evapotranspiration and soil moisture at different soil depths. The analysis supports the need of observations within the catchment for model assessment, but it indicates that different strategies should be considered for the different variables. Evapotranspiration measurements are needed at daily resolution across several locations, while highly resolved spatially distributed observations with lower temporal frequency are required for soil moisture. Finally, the results show the impact of the shallow groundwater system simulated by ParFlow‐CLM and the need to account for the related soil moisture redistribution. Our comparison strategy can be applied to other models types and environmental conditions to strengthen the dialog between modelers and experimentalists for improving process representations in Earth system models.