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
Preprint under review for HESS
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Catchment hydrology | Techniques and Approaches: Modelling approaches
On the use of streamflow transformations for hydrological model calibration
Guillaume Thirel, Léonard Santos, Olivier Delaigue, and Charles Perrin
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4837–4860, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4837-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4837-2024, 2024
Short summary
Simulation-based inference for parameter estimation of complex watershed simulators
Robert Hull, Elena Leonarduzzi, Luis De La Fuente, Hoang Viet Tran, Andrew Bennett, Peter Melchior, Reed M. Maxwell, and Laura E. Condon
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4685–4713, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4685-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4685-2024, 2024
Short summary
Multi-scale soil moisture data and process-based modeling reveal the importance of lateral groundwater flow in a subarctic catchment
Jari-Pekka Nousu, Kersti Leppä, Hannu Marttila, Pertti Ala-aho, Giulia Mazzotti, Terhikki Manninen, Mika Korkiakoski, Mika Aurela, Annalea Lohila, and Samuli Launiainen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4643–4666, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4643-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4643-2024, 2024
Short summary
Catchment response to climatic variability: implications for root zone storage and streamflow predictions
Nienke Tempel, Laurène Bouaziz, Riccardo Taormina, Ellis van Noppen, Jasper Stam, Eric Sprokkereef, and Markus Hrachowitz
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4577–4597, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4577-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4577-2024, 2024
Short summary
Hybrid hydrological modeling for large alpine basins: a semi-distributed approach
Bu Li, Ting Sun, Fuqiang Tian, Mahmut Tudaji, Li Qin, and Guangheng Ni
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4521–4538, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4521-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4521-2024, 2024
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.