• Budyko, M. I., 1974: Climate and Life. Academic, 508 pp.

  • Choudhury, B. J., 1999: Evaluation of an empirical equation for annual evaporation using field observations and results from a biophysical model. J. Hydrol., 216 , 99110.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • de Rosnay, P., and Polcher J. , 1998: Modelling root water uptake in a complex land surface scheme coupled to a GCM. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 2 , 239255.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dickinson, R. E., Jaeger J. , Washington W. M. , and Wolski R. , 1981: Boundary subroutine for the NCAR global climate model. National Center for Atmospheric Research Tech. Note TN-173+1A, 75 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dorman, J. L., and Sellers P. J. , 1989: A global climatology of albedo, roughness length and stomatal resistance for atmospheric general circulation models as represented by the Simple Biosphere Model (SiB). J. Appl. Meteor., 28 , 833855.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jackson, R. B., Canadell J. , Ehleringer J. R. , Mooney H. A. , Sala O. E. , and Schulze E. D. , 1996: A global analysis of root distributions for terrestrial biomes. Oecologia, 108 , 389411.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kleidon, A., and Heimann M. , 1998: Optimised rooting depth and its impact on the simulated climate of an Atmospheric General Circulation Model. Geophys. Res. Lett., 25 , 345348.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Koster, R. D., Oki T. , and Suarez M. J. , 1999: The offline validation of land surface models: Assessing success at the annual timescale. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 77 , 257263.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Manabe, S., 1969: Climate and the ocean circulation. 1. The atmospheric circulation and the hydrology of the earth's surface. Mon. Wea. Rev., 97 , 739774.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Matthews, E., 1983: Global vegetation and land use: New high-resolution data bases for climate studies. J. Climate Appl. Meteor., 22 , 474487.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Milly, P. C. D., 1994: Climate, soil water storage, and the average annual water balance. Water Resour. Res., 30 , 21432156.

  • Milly, P. C. D., and Shmakin A. B. , 2002: Global modeling of land water and energy balances. Part I: The Land Dynamics (LaD) model. J. Hydrometeor., 3 , 283299.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pike, J. G., 1964: The estimation of annual run-off from meteorological data in a tropical climate. J. Hydrol., 2 , 116123.

  • Sellers, P. J., Mintz Y. , Sud Y. C. , and Dalcher A. , 1986: A Simple Biosphere Model (SiB) for use within atmospheric general circulation models. J. Atmos. Sci., 43 , 505531.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Turc, L., 1954: Le bilan d'eau des sols: Relations entre les précipitations, l'évaporation et l'écoulement. Ann. Agron., 5 , 491595.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zeng, X., Dai Y-J. , Dickinson R. E. , and Shaikh M. , 1998: The role of root distribution for climate simulation over land. Geophys. Res. Lett., 25 , 45334536.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zobler, L., 1986: A world soil file for global climate modeling. National Aeronautics and Space Administration Tech. Memo. 87802, 33 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 165 30 4
PDF Downloads 37 16 0

Global Modeling of Land Water and Energy Balances. Part II: Land-Characteristic Contributions to Spatial Variability

View More View Less
  • 1 U.S. Geological Survey and NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, New Jersey
  • | 2 NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, New Jersey
Restricted access

Abstract

Land water and energy balances vary around the globe because of variations in amount and temporal distribution of water and energy supplies and because of variations in land characteristics. The former control (water and energy supplies) explains much more variance in water and energy balances than the latter (land characteristics). A largely untested hypothesis underlying most global models of land water and energy balance is the assumption that parameter values based on estimated geographic distributions of soil and vegetation characteristics improve the performance of the models relative to the use of globally constant land parameters. This hypothesis is tested here through an evaluation of the improvement in performance of one land model associated with the introduction of geographic information on land characteristics. The capability of the model to reproduce annual runoff ratios of large river basins, with and without information on the global distribution of albedo, rooting depth, and stomatal resistance, is assessed. To allow a fair comparison, the model is calibrated in both cases by adjusting globally constant scale factors for snow-free albedo, non-water-stressed bulk stomatal resistance, and critical root density (which is used to determine effective root-zone depth). The test is made in stand-alone mode, that is, using prescribed radiative and atmospheric forcing. Model performance is evaluated by comparing modeled runoff ratios with observed runoff ratios for a set of basins where precipitation biases have been shown to be minimal.

The withholding of information on global variations in these parameters leads to a significant degradation of the capability of the model to simulate the annual runoff ratio. An additional set of optimization experiments, in which the parameters are examined individually, reveals that the stomatal resistance is, by far, the parameter among these three whose spatial variations add the most predictive power to the model in stand-alone mode. Further single-parameter experiments with surface roughness length, available water capacity, thermal conductivity, and thermal diffusivity show very little sensitivity to estimated global variations in these parameters. Finally, it is found that even the constant-parameter model performance exceeds that of the Budyko and generalized Turc–Pike water-balance equations, suggesting that the model benefits also from information on the geographic variability of the temporal structure of forcing.

Current affiliation: Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

Corresponding author address: Dr. P. C. D. Milly, Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey, NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, P.O. Box 308, Princeton, NJ 08542. Email: cmilly@usgs.gov

Abstract

Land water and energy balances vary around the globe because of variations in amount and temporal distribution of water and energy supplies and because of variations in land characteristics. The former control (water and energy supplies) explains much more variance in water and energy balances than the latter (land characteristics). A largely untested hypothesis underlying most global models of land water and energy balance is the assumption that parameter values based on estimated geographic distributions of soil and vegetation characteristics improve the performance of the models relative to the use of globally constant land parameters. This hypothesis is tested here through an evaluation of the improvement in performance of one land model associated with the introduction of geographic information on land characteristics. The capability of the model to reproduce annual runoff ratios of large river basins, with and without information on the global distribution of albedo, rooting depth, and stomatal resistance, is assessed. To allow a fair comparison, the model is calibrated in both cases by adjusting globally constant scale factors for snow-free albedo, non-water-stressed bulk stomatal resistance, and critical root density (which is used to determine effective root-zone depth). The test is made in stand-alone mode, that is, using prescribed radiative and atmospheric forcing. Model performance is evaluated by comparing modeled runoff ratios with observed runoff ratios for a set of basins where precipitation biases have been shown to be minimal.

The withholding of information on global variations in these parameters leads to a significant degradation of the capability of the model to simulate the annual runoff ratio. An additional set of optimization experiments, in which the parameters are examined individually, reveals that the stomatal resistance is, by far, the parameter among these three whose spatial variations add the most predictive power to the model in stand-alone mode. Further single-parameter experiments with surface roughness length, available water capacity, thermal conductivity, and thermal diffusivity show very little sensitivity to estimated global variations in these parameters. Finally, it is found that even the constant-parameter model performance exceeds that of the Budyko and generalized Turc–Pike water-balance equations, suggesting that the model benefits also from information on the geographic variability of the temporal structure of forcing.

Current affiliation: Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

Corresponding author address: Dr. P. C. D. Milly, Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey, NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, P.O. Box 308, Princeton, NJ 08542. Email: cmilly@usgs.gov

Save