TY - JOUR
T1 - Multicriteria evaluation of discharge simulation in Dynamic Global Vegetation Models
AU - Yang, Hui
AU - Piao, Shilong
AU - Zeng, Zhenzhong
AU - Ciais, Philippe
AU - Yin, Yi
AU - Friedlingstein, Pierre
AU - Sitch, Stephen
AU - Ahlström, Anders
AU - Guimberteau, Matthieu
AU - Huntingford, Chris
AU - Levis, Sam
AU - Levy, Peter E.
AU - Huang, Mengtian
AU - Li, Yue
AU - Li, Xiran
AU - Lomas, Mark R.
AU - Peylin, Philippe
AU - Poulter, Ben
AU - Viovy, Nicolas
AU - Zaehle, Soenke
AU - Zeng, Ning
AU - Zhao, Fang
AU - Wang, Lei
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - In this study, we assessed the performance of discharge simulations by coupling the runoff from seven Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs; LPJ, ORCHIDEE, Sheffield-DGVM, TRIFFID, LPJ-GUESS, CLM4CN, and OCN) to one river routing model for 16 large river basins. The results show that the seasonal cycle of river discharge is generally modeled well in the low and middle latitudes but not in the high latitudes, where the peak discharge (due to snow and ice melting) is underestimated. For the annual mean discharge, the DGVMs chained with the routing model show an underestimation. Furthermore, the 30 year trend of discharge is also underestimated. For the interannual variability of discharge, a skill score based on overlapping of probability density functions (PDFs) suggests that most models correctly reproduce the observed variability (correlation coefficient higher than 0.5; i.e., models account for 50% of observed interannual variability) except for the Lena, Yenisei, Yukon, and the Congo river basins. In addition, we compared the simulated runoff from different simulations where models were forced with either fixed or varying land use. This suggests that both seasonal and annual mean runoff has been little affected by land use change but that the trend itself of runoff is sensitive to land use change. None of the models when considered individually show significantly better performances than any other and in all basins. This suggests that based on current modeling capability, a regional-weighted average of multimodel ensemble projections might be appropriate to reduce the bias in future projection of global river discharge.
AB - In this study, we assessed the performance of discharge simulations by coupling the runoff from seven Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs; LPJ, ORCHIDEE, Sheffield-DGVM, TRIFFID, LPJ-GUESS, CLM4CN, and OCN) to one river routing model for 16 large river basins. The results show that the seasonal cycle of river discharge is generally modeled well in the low and middle latitudes but not in the high latitudes, where the peak discharge (due to snow and ice melting) is underestimated. For the annual mean discharge, the DGVMs chained with the routing model show an underestimation. Furthermore, the 30 year trend of discharge is also underestimated. For the interannual variability of discharge, a skill score based on overlapping of probability density functions (PDFs) suggests that most models correctly reproduce the observed variability (correlation coefficient higher than 0.5; i.e., models account for 50% of observed interannual variability) except for the Lena, Yenisei, Yukon, and the Congo river basins. In addition, we compared the simulated runoff from different simulations where models were forced with either fixed or varying land use. This suggests that both seasonal and annual mean runoff has been little affected by land use change but that the trend itself of runoff is sensitive to land use change. None of the models when considered individually show significantly better performances than any other and in all basins. This suggests that based on current modeling capability, a regional-weighted average of multimodel ensemble projections might be appropriate to reduce the bias in future projection of global river discharge.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84940462696
U2 - 10.1002/2015JD023129
DO - 10.1002/2015JD023129
M3 - 文章
AN - SCOPUS:84940462696
SN - 0148-0227
VL - 120
SP - 7488
EP - 7505
JO - Journal of Geophysical Research
JF - Journal of Geophysical Research
IS - 15
ER -