Articles | Volume 19, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-711-2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-711-2015
Research article
 | 
04 Feb 2015
Research article |  | 04 Feb 2015

How does bias correction of regional climate model precipitation affect modelled runoff?

J. Teng, N. J. Potter, F. H. S. Chiew, L. Zhang, B. Wang, J. Vaze, and J. P. Evans

Related authors

Very high spatial and temporal resolution rainfall data for accurate flood inundation modelling
Chi Nguyen, Jai Vaze, Cherry May R. Mateo, Michael F. Hutchinson, and Jin Teng
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-228,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-228, 2024
Preprint under review for HESS
Short summary
Comparison of BARRA and ERA5 in Replicating Mean and Extreme Precipitation over Australia
Kevin K. W. Cheung, Fei Ji, Nidhi Nishant, Jin Teng, James Bennett, and De Li Liu
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-286,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-286, 2024
Revised manuscript under review for HESS
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Catchment hydrology | Techniques and Approaches: Modelling approaches
A diversity-centric strategy for the selection of spatio-temporal training data for LSTM-based streamflow forecasting
Everett Snieder and Usman T. Khan
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 785–798, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-785-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-785-2025, 2025
Short summary
Simulating the Tone River eastward diversion project in Japan carried out 4 centuries ago
Joško Trošelj and Naota Hanasaki
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 753–766, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-753-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-753-2025, 2025
Short summary
Lack of robustness of hydrological models: a large-sample diagnosis and an attempt to identify hydrological and climatic drivers
Léonard Santos, Vazken Andréassian, Torben O. Sonnenborg, Göran Lindström, Alban de Lavenne, Charles Perrin, Lila Collet, and Guillaume Thirel
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 683–700, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-683-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-683-2025, 2025
Short summary
Achieving water budget closure through physical hydrological process modelling: insights from a large-sample study
Xudong Zheng, Dengfeng Liu, Shengzhi Huang, Hao Wang, and Xianmeng Meng
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 627–653, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-627-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-627-2025, 2025
Short summary
Heavy-tailed flood peak distributions: what is the effect of the spatial variability of rainfall and runoff generation?
Elena Macdonald, Bruno Merz, Viet Dung Nguyen, and Sergiy Vorogushyn
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 447–463, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-447-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-447-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Argüeso, D., Evans, J. P., and Fita, L.: Precipitation bias correction of very high resolution regional climate models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 4379–4388, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-4379-2013, 2013.
Bennett, J. C., Ling, F. L. N., Post, D. A., Grose, M. R., Corney, S. P., Graham, B., Holz, G. K., Katzfey, J. J., and Bindoff, N. L.: High-resolution projections of surface water availability for Tasmania, Australia, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 1287–1303, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-1287-2012, 2012.
Bennett, J. C., Grose, M. R., Corney, S. P., White, C. J., Holz, G. K., Katzfey, J. J., Post, D. A., and Bindoff, N. L.: Performance of an empirical bias-correction of a high-resolution climate data set, Int. J. Climatol., 34, 2189–2204, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3830, 2014.
Berg, P., Feldmann, H., and Panitz, H. J.: Bias correction of high resolution regional climate model data, J. Hydrol., 448–449, 80–92, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.04.026, 2012.
Boe, J., Terray, L., Habets, F., and Martin, E.: Statistical and dynamical downscaling of the Seine basin climate for hydro-meteorological studies, Int. J. Climatol., 27, 1643–1655, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1602, 2007.
Download
Short summary
This paper assesses four bias correction methods applied to RCM-simulated precipitation, and their follow-on impact on modelled runoff. The differences between the methods are small, mainly due to the substantial corrections required and inconsistent errors over time. The methods cannot overcome limitations of the RCM in simulating precipitation sequence, which affects runoff generation. Furthermore, bias correction can introduce additional uncertainty to change signals in modelled runoff.
Share