عنوان مقاله [English]
Regarding to various sources of climatological data, identification of suitable sources and investigation of their usage effects on hydrological simulation is an important issue. Moreover, given that hydrological models employ different methods for preparation of climatological data, e.g. spatial interpolation of point climatological data, evaluation of the effects of different methods on hydrological simulation’s result is an important issue. Accordingly, this paper deals with different data sources and spatial interpolation of precipitation that are investigated in hydrological simulation of Mahabad Chai River Basin using SWAT model. Different climatological sources, i.e. field measurements of meteorological stations of MOE and IRIMO as well as reanalyzed data of CFSR project, and different interpolation methods, i.e. nearest neighborhood (NN) and inverse distance method (IDW) were employed and compared for preparation of inputs of SWAT model using a developed computational module in Module Builder framework of ArcMap. Then parameters sensitivity analysis, estimation and model validation were performed based on a period of 36-years monthly streamflow record. Results showed using CFSR data leads to Nash-Sutcliffe (NS) value of 0.58 as compared to climatological stations’ data which leads to NS value of 0.38. Additionally, IDW method showed a better performance significantly than the NN method, so that their NS index values were 0.79 and 0.56, respectively.
Abbaspour, K. C., Yang, J., Maximov, I., Siber, R., Bogner, K., Mieleitner, J., Srinivasan, R. (2007). Modelling hydrology and water quality in the pre-alpine/alpine Thur watershed using SWAT. Journal of Hydrology, 333(2–4), 413–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.09.014
Bai, J., Shen, Z., & Yan, T. (2017). A comparison of single- and multi-site calibration and validation: a case study of SWAT in the Miyun Reservoir watershed, China. Frontiers of Earth Science, 11(3), 592–600. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-017-0656-x
Dirks, K. N., Hay, J. E., Stow, C. D., & Harris, D. (1998). High-resolution studies of rainfall on Norfolk Island: Part II: Interpolation of rainfall data. Journal of Hydrology, 208(3–4), 187–193.
Haberlandt, U., & Kite, G. W. (1998). Estimation of daily space-time precipitation series for macroscale hydrological modelling Abstract :, 1432(June 1997), 1419–1432.
Masih, I., Maskey, S., Uhlenbrook, S., & Smakhtin, V. (2011). Assessing the Impact of Areal Precipitation Input on Streamflow Simulations Using the SWAT Model. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 47(1), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2010.00502.x
Maskey, S., Guinot, V., & Price, R. K. (2004). Treatment of precipitation uncertainty in rainfall-runoff modelling: A fuzzy set approach. Advances in Water Resources, 27(9), 889–898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2004.07.001
Moriasi, D. N., Arnold, J. G., Liew, M. W. Van, Bingner, R. L., Harmel, R. D., Veith, T. L., … Veith, T. L. (2007). Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Transactions of the ASABE, 50(3), 885–900.
Neitsch, S. L., Arnold, J. G., Kiniry, J. R., Williams, J. R., Documentation, T., Shekhar, S., … Williams, J. R. (2011). Soil and water assessment tool theoretical documentation version 2009. Encyclopedia of GIS. Texas Water Resources Institute. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35973-1_1231
Obled, C., Wendling, J., & Beven, K. (1994). The sensitivity of hydrological models to spatial rainfall patterns: an evaluation using observed data. Journal of Hydrology, 159(1–4), 305–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(94)90263-1
Radcliffe, D. E., & Mukundan, R. (2017). PRISM vs. CFSR precipitation data effects on calibration and validation of SWAT models. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 53(1), 89–100.
Starks, P. J., & Moriasi, D. N. (2009). Spatial resolution effect of precipitation data on SWAT calibration and performance: implications for CEAP. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 52(4), 1171–1180. https://doi.org/ISSN 0001-2351 1171
Szcześniak, M., & Piniewski, M. (2015). Improvement of hydrological simulations by applying daily precipitation interpolation schemes in meso-scale catchments. Water, 7(2), 747–779.
Tobin, C., Nicotina, L., Parlange, M. B., Berne, A., & Rinaldo, A. (2011). Improved interpolation of meteorological forcings for hydrologic applications in a Swiss Alpine region. Journal of Hydrology, 401(1–2), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.02.010
Tuo, Y., Duan, Z., Disse, M., & Chiogna, G. (2016). Evaluation of precipitation input for SWAT modeling in Alpine catchment: A case study in the Adige river basin (Italy). Science of the Total Environment, 573, 66–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.08.034
Wood, G. B., Wiant, H. V, Loy, J., & Miles, J. A. (1990). Centroid sampling : A variant of importance sampling for estimating the volume of sample trees of radiata pine, 36, 233–243.
Yang, Y., Wang, G., Wang, L., Yu, J., & Xu, Z. (2014). Evaluation of gridded precipitation data for driving SWAT model in area upstream of three gorges reservoir. PloS One, 9(11), e112725. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112725
Yu, M., Chen, X., Li, L., Bao, A., & de la Paix, M. J. (2011). Streamflow Simulation by SWAT Using Different Precipitation Sources in Large Arid Basins with Scarce Raingauges. Water Resources Management, 25(11), 2669–2681. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-011-9832-z
Zhang, L., He, C., Li, J., Wang, Y., & Wang, Z. (2017).
COMPARISON OF IDW AND PHYSICALLY BASED IDEW METHOD IN HYDROLOGICAL MODELLING FOR A LARGE MOUNTAINOUS WATERSHED , NORTHWEST CHINA. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.3147