Articles | Volume 19, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-275-2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-275-2015
Research article
 | 
16 Jan 2015
Research article |  | 16 Jan 2015

The skill of seasonal ensemble low-flow forecasts in the Moselle River for three different hydrological models

M. C. Demirel, M. J. Booij, and A. Y. Hoekstra

Related authors

CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM DRIVES DISAGREEMENT AMONG BRAZILIAN VEGETATION MAPS AT A SAMPLE AREA OF THE SEMIARID CAATINGA
E. Bontempo, M. C. Demirel, C. Corsini, F. Martins, and D. Valeriano
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLII-3-W12-2020, 201–206, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-3-W12-2020-201-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-3-W12-2020-201-2020, 2020
Selection of multi-model ensemble of general circulation models for the simulation of precipitation and maximum and minimum temperature based on spatial assessment metrics
Kamal Ahmed, Dhanapala A. Sachindra, Shamsuddin Shahid, Mehmet C. Demirel, and Eun-Sung Chung
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4803–4824, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4803-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4803-2019, 2019
Short summary
The SPAtial EFficiency metric (SPAEF): multiple-component evaluation of spatial patterns for optimization of hydrological models
Julian Koch, Mehmet Cüneyd Demirel, and Simon Stisen
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 1873–1886, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1873-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-1873-2018, 2018
Short summary
Combining satellite data and appropriate objective functions for improved spatial pattern performance of a distributed hydrologic model
Mehmet C. Demirel, Juliane Mai, Gorka Mendiguren, Julian Koch, Luis Samaniego, and Simon Stisen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1299–1315, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1299-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1299-2018, 2018
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Catchment hydrology | Techniques and Approaches: Uncertainty analysis
Use of expert elicitation to assign weights to climate and hydrological models in climate impact studies
Eva Sebok, Hans Jørgen Henriksen, Ernesto Pastén-Zapata, Peter Berg, Guillaume Thirel, Anthony Lemoine, Andrea Lira-Loarca, Christiana Photiadou, Rafael Pimentel, Paul Royer-Gaspard, Erik Kjellström, Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen, Jean Philippe Vidal, Philippe Lucas-Picher, Markus G. Donat, Giovanni Besio, María José Polo, Simon Stisen, Yvan Caballero, Ilias G. Pechlivanidis, Lars Troldborg, and Jens Christian Refsgaard
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5605–5625, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5605-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5605-2022, 2022
Short summary
Pitfalls and a feasible solution for using KGE as an informal likelihood function in MCMC methods: DREAM(ZS) as an example
Yan Liu, Jaime Fernández-Ortega, Matías Mudarra, and Andreas Hartmann
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5341–5355, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5341-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5341-2022, 2022
Short summary
Benchmarking global hydrological and land surface models against GRACE in a medium-sized tropical basin
Silvana Bolaños Chavarría, Micha Werner, Juan Fernando Salazar, and Teresita Betancur Vargas
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 4323–4344, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-4323-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-4323-2022, 2022
Short summary
Why our rainfall-runoff models keep underestimating the peak flows?
András Bárdossy and Faizan Anwar
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2022-281,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2022-281, 2022
Preprint under review for HESS
Short summary
Guidance on evaluating parametric model uncertainty at decision-relevant scales
Jared D. Smith, Laurence Lin, Julianne D. Quinn, and Lawrence E. Band
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2519–2539, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2519-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2519-2022, 2022
Short summary

Cited articles

Adamowski, J., Chan, H. F., Prasher, S. O., Ozga-Zielinski, B., and Sliusarieva, A.: Comparison of multiple linear and nonlinear regression, autoregressive integrated moving average, artificial neural network, and wavelet artificial neural network methods for urban water demand forecasting in Montreal, Canada, Water Resour. Res., 48, W01528, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010wr009945, 2012.
Archer, D. R. and Fowler, H. J.: Using meteorological data to forecast seasonal runoff on the River Jhelum, Pakistan, J. Hydrol., 361, 10–23, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.07.017, 2008.
ATV-DVWK: Verdunstung in Bezug zu Landnutzung, Bewuchs und Boden, Merkblatt ATV-DVWK-M 504, Hennef, 2002.
Bell, V. A., Davies, H. N., Kay, A. L., Marsh, T. J., Brookshaw, A., and Jenkins, A.: Developing a large-scale water-balance approach to seasonal forecasting: application to the 2012 drought in Britain, Hydrol. Process., 27, 3003–3012, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9863, 2013.
Bierkens, M. F. P. and van Beek, L. P. H.: Seasonal Predictability of European Discharge: NAO and Hydrological Response Time, J. Hydrometeorol., 10, 953–968, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009jhm1034.1, 2009.
Download
Short summary
This paper investigates the skill of 90-day low-flow forecasts using three models. From the results, it appears that all models are prone to over-predict runoff during low-flow periods using ensemble seasonal meteorological forcing. The largest range for 90-day low-flow forecasts is found for the GR4J model. Overall, the uncertainty from ensemble P forecasts has a larger effect on seasonal low-flow forecasts than the uncertainty from ensemble PET forecasts and initial model conditions.