Evaluating Direct Assimilation of Satellite-Based Potential Evapotranspiration into SWAT for Improving Hydrological Modeling
Publication: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 28, Issue 11
Abstract
A correct estimation of evapotranspiration (ET) is required to determine the amount of available water in any watershed. Potential evapotranspiration (PET) is used to estimate actual evapotranspiration (AET). The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) has different methods to compute PET; in data-scarce watersheds hydrological modeling is typically challenging. Although there are a lot of remotely sensed PET (RS-PET) data, validation of hydrological models using these data has rarely been studied in such watersheds. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to assess the impacts of direct assimilation of RS-PET on water balance components using SWAT for a basin in Iran with limited data. To this end, we changed the SWAT source code to automatically integrate RS-PET data. The performance of the model was then evaluated using streamflow data and AET for the period 2001–2005. The results reveal that the Default PET model overestimates soil moisture, underestimates AET, and ultimately fails to appropriately capture streamflow at the watershed’s outlet. However, by incorporating RS-PET, the model improves the accuracy of PET, AET, soil moisture, and streamflow. For example, in the Default PET scenario, the Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency streamflow was 0.66, whereas it was 15% higher in the RS-PET scheme. The findings also demonstrate the SWAT parameters’ sensitivity to PET values and the efficiency of RS-PET in enhancing hydrologic modeling in regions with limited data.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data and models that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
Abbaspour, K. C., C. A. Johnson, and M. T. Van Genuchten. 2004. “Estimating uncertain flow and transport parameters using a sequential uncertainty fitting procedure.” Vadose Zone J. 3 (4): 1340–1352. https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2004.1340.
Abbaspour, K. C., E. Rouholahnejad, S. Vaghefi, R. Srinivasan, H. Yang, and B. Kløve. 2015. “A continental-scale hydrology and water quality model for Europe: Calibration and uncertainty of a high-resolution large-scale SWAT model.” J. Hydrol. 524 (May): 733–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.03.027.
Adjei, F. O., E. Obuobie, K. A. Adjei, and S. N. Odai. 2023. “Evaluation of potential evapotranspiration assessment methods for hydrological modelling with SWAT in the Densu river basin in Ghana.” Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 20 (1): 921–930. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022-03945-y.
Alemayehu, T., A. van Griensven, and W. Bauwens. 2016. “Evaluating CFSR and WATCH data as input to SWAT for the estimation of the potential evapotranspiration in a data-scarce Eastern-African catchment.” J. Hydrol. Eng. 21 (3): 05015028. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001305.
Amatya, D. M., S. Irmak, P. Gowda, G. Sun, J. E. Nettles, and K. R. Douglas-Mankin. 2016. “Ecosystem evapotranspiration: Challenges in measurements, estimates, and modeling.” Trans. ASABE 59 (2): 555–560. https://doi.org/10.13031/trans.59.11808.
Amatya, D. M., and M. K. Jha. 2011. “Evaluating the SWAT model for a low-gradient forested watershed in coastal South Carolina.” Trans. ASABE 54 (6): 2151–2163. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.40671.
Arnold, J. G., R. Srinivasan, R. S. Muttiah, and J. R. Williams. 1998. “Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment part I: Model development.” JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 34 (1): 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x.
Bai, P., X. Liu, T. Yang, F. Li, K. Liang, S. Hu, and C. Liu. 2016. “Assessment of the influences of different potential evapotranspiration inputs on the performance of monthly hydrological models under different climatic conditions.” J. Hydrometeorol. 17 (8): 2259–2274. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-15-0202.1.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2015. “FAO/UNESCO soil map of the world.” FAO Soils Portal. Accessed July 10, 2022. https://www.fao.org/soils-portal/data-hub/soil-maps-and-databases/faounesco-soil-map-of-the-world/en/.
Favis-Mortlock, D. 2013. “Non-linear dynamics, self-organization and cellular automata models.” In Environmental modelling: Finding simplicity in complexity, 45–67. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
FRW (Natural Resources and Watershed Management Organization of Iran). 2020. “Maps.” Accessed July 10, 2022. https://sdi.frw.ir/maps/72/view.
Fuka, D. R., M. T. Walter, C. MacAlister, A. T. Degaetano, T. S. Steenhuis, and Z. M. Easton. 2014. “Using the climate forecast system reanalysis as weather input data for watershed models.” Hydrol. Processes 28 (22): 5613–5623. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10073.
GLEAM (Global Land Evaporation Amsterdam Model). 2017. “Global land evaporation Amsterdam model v3.0a. Algorithm set.” Accessed July 10, 2022. https://www.gleam.eu/.
Grismer, M. E., M. Orang, R. Snyder, and R. Matyac. 2002. “Pan evaporation to reference evapotranspiration conversion methods.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 128 (3): 180–184. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2002)128:3(180).
Hargreaves, G. H., and R. G. Allen. 2003. “History and evaluation of Hargreaves evapotranspiration equation.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 129 (1): 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2003)129:1(53).
Heathman, G. C., P. J. Starks, L. R. Ahuja, and T. J. Jackson. 2003. “Assimilation of surface soil moisture to estimate profile soil water content.” J. Hydrol. 279 (1–4): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00088-X.
Heermann, D. F. 1988. “Evapotranspiration research priorities for the next decade—Irrigation.” Trans. ASAE 31 (2): 497–502. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.30737.
Her, Y., J. Frankenberger, I. Chaubey, and R. Srinivasan. 2015. “Threshold effects in HRU definition of the soil and water assessment tool.” Trans. ASABE 58 (2): 367–378. https://doi.org/10.13031/trans.58.10805.
Igder, O. M., H. Alizadeh, B. Mojaradi, and M. Bayat. 2022. “Multivariate assimilation of satellite-based leaf area index and ground-based river streamflow for hydrological modelling of irrigated watersheds using SWAT+.” J. Hydrol. 610 (Jul): 128012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.128012.
Kang, M., S. Park, H. Kwon, H. T. Choi, Y.-J. Choi, and J. Kim. 2009. “Evapotranspiration from a deciduous forest in a complex terrain and a heterogeneous farmland under monsoon climate.” Asia-Pac. J. Atmos. Sci. 45 (2): 175–191.
Khoi, D. N. 2016. “Comparison of the HEC-HMS and SWAT hydrological models in simulating the stream flow.” J. Sci. Technol. 53 (5A): 189–195.
Kobrick, M., and R. Crippen. 2007. “NASA shuttle radar topography mission global 30 arc second.” SRTMGL30 v021. NASA Making Earth System Data Records for Use in Research Environments (MEaSUREs) Program. Accessed July 10, 2022. https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/products/srtmgl30v021/.
Koedyk, L. P., and D. G. Kingston. 2016. “Potential evapotranspiration method influence on climate change impacts on river flow: A mid-latitude case study.” Hydrol. Res. 47 (5): 951–963. https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2016.152.
Looper, J. P., B. E. Vieux, and M. A. Moreno. 2012. “Assessing the impacts of precipitation bias on distributed hydrologic model calibration and prediction accuracy.” J. Hydrol. 418 (Feb): 110–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.09.048.
Lu, J., G. Sun, S. G. McNulty, and D. M. Amatya. 2005. “A comparison of six potential evapotranspiration methods for regional use in the southeastern United States.” JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 41 (3): 621–633. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2005.tb03759.x.
Martens, B., D. G. Miralles, H. Lievens, R. Van Der Schalie, R. A. De Jeu, D. Fernández-Prieto, H. E. Beck, W. A. Dorigo, and N. E. Verhoest. 2017. “GLEAM v3: Satellite-based land evaporation and root-zone soil moisture.” Geosci. Model Dev. 10 (5): 1903–1925. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1903-2017.
Miralles, D. G., T. R. H. Holmes, R. A. M. de Jeu, J. H. Gash, A. G. C. A. Meesters, and A. J. Dolman. 2011. “Global land-surface evaporation estimated from satellite-based observations.” Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 15 (2): 453–469. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-453-2011.
Monteith, J. 1965. “Evaporation and the environment.” In Proc., The State and Movement of Water in Living Organisms, XIXth Symp. of the Society for Experimental Biology. Swansea, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Moriasi, D. N., M. W. Gitau, N. Pai, and P. Daggupati. 2015. “Hydrologic and water quality models: Performance measures and evaluation criteria.” Trans. ASABE 58 (6): 1763–1785. https://doi.org/10.13031/trans.58.10715.
Mu, Q., M. Zhao, and S. W. Running. 2011. “Improvements to a MODIS global terrestrial evapotranspiration algorithm.” Remote Sens. Environ. 115 (8): 1781–1800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.02.019.
Mu, Q., M. Zhao, and S. W. Running. 2013. MODIS global terrestrial evapotranspiration (ET) product (NASA MOD16A2/A3). Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Myneni, R., Y. Knyazikhin, and N. Shabanov. 2010. “Leaf area index and fraction of absorbed PAR products from Terra and Aqua MODIS sensors: Analysis, validation, and refinement.” In Land remote sensing and global environmental change, 603–633. New York: Springer.
Neitsch, S. L., J. G. Arnold, J. R. Kiniry, and J. R. Williams. 2011. Soil and water assessment tool theoretical documentation version 2009. Washington, DC: USDA.
Priestley, C. H. B., and R. J. Taylor. 1972. “On the assessment of surface heat flux and evaporation using large-scale parameters.” Mon. Weather Rev. 100 (2): 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1972)100%3C0081:OTAOSH%3E2.3.CO;2.
Rajib, A., G. R. Evenson, H. E. Golden, and C. R. Lane. 2018. “Hydrologic model predictability improves with spatially explicit calibration using remotely sensed evapotranspiration and biophysical parameters.” J. Hydrol. 567 (Dec): 668–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.10.024.
Rajib, A., I. L. Kim, H. E. Golden, C. R. Lane, S. V. Kumar, Z. Yu, and S. Jeyalakshmi. 2020. “Watershed modeling with remotely sensed big data: MODIS leaf area index improves hydrology and water quality predictions.” Remote Sens. 12 (13): 2148. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12132148.
Running, S. 2015. “MODIS/terra net evapotranspiration 8-day L4 global 500 m SIN grid.” Data Set. MOD16A2 v006. Accessed July 10, 2022. https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/products/mod16a2v006/.
Samadi, S., D. L. Tufford, and G. J. Carbone. 2014. Improving hydrologic predictions of distributed watershed model via uncertainty quantification of evapotranspiration methods. Columbia, SC: South Carolina Water Resource Conference.
Samadi, S. Z. 2017. “Assessing the sensitivity of SWAT physical parameters to potential evapotranspiration estimation methods over a coastal plain watershed in the southeastern United States.” Hydrol. Res. 48 (2): 395–415. https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2016.034.
Srivastava, P. K., D. Han, M. A. Rico-Ramirez, and T. Islam. 2014. “Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of mesoscale model downscaled hydro-meteorological variables for discharge prediction.” Hydrol. Processes 28 (15): 4419–4432. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9946.
Strauch, M., C. Bernhofer, S. Koide, M. Volk, C. Lorz, and F. Makeschin. 2012. “Using precipitation data ensemble for uncertainty analysis in SWAT streamflow simulation.” J. Hydrol. 414 (Jan): 413–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.11.014.
Trambauer, P., E. Dutra, S. Maskey, M. Werner, F. Pappenberger, L. Van Beek, and S. Uhlenbrook. 2014. “Comparison of different evaporation estimates over the African continent.” Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 18 (1): 193–212. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-193-2014.
Wang, K., and R. E. Dickinson. 2012. “A review of global terrestrial evapotranspiration: Observation, modeling, climatology, and climatic variability.” Rev. Geophys. 50 (2). https://doi.org/10.1029/2011RG000373.
WRM (Iran Water Resources Management Company). 2018. “Basic information and statistics of daily streamflow, daily precipitation and evaporation data.” Accessed July 10, 2022. https://stu.wrm.ir/tbl_amarrequests_add.asp.
Xu, C.-Y. 2021. “Issues influencing accuracy of hydrological modeling in a changing environment.” Water Sci. Eng. 14 (2): 167–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wse.2021.06.005.
Xu, X., H. Yang, D. Yang, and H. Ma. 2013. “Assessing the impacts of climate variability and human activities on annual runoff in the Luan River basin, China.” Hydrol. Res. 44 (5): 940–952. https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2013.144.
Yang, X., B. Yong, L. Ren, Y. Zhang, and D. Long. 2017. “Multi-scale validation of GLEAM evapotranspiration products over China via ChinaFLUX ET measurements.” Int. J. Remote Sens. 38 (20): 5688–5709. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2017.1346400.
Yin, J., C. Zhan, and W. Ye. 2016. “An experimental study on evapotranspiration data assimilation based on the hydrological model.” Water Resour. Manage. 30 (14): 5263–5279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-016-1485-5.
Yuan, Y., R. Wang, E. Cooter, L. Ran, P. Daggupati, D. Yang, R. Srinivasan, and A. Jalowska. 2018. “Integrating multimedia models to assess nitrogen losses from the Mississippi River basin to the Gulf of Mexico.” Biogeosciences 15 (23): 7059–7076. https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-7059-2018.
Zhang, D., X. Chen, H. Yao, and B. Lin. 2015. “Improved calibration scheme of SWAT by separating wet and dry seasons.” Ecol. Modell. 301 (Apr): 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.01.018.
Zhang, Y., et al. 2016. “Multi-decadal trends in global terrestrial evapotranspiration and its components.” Sci. Rep. 6 (1): 19124. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep19124.
Zhang, Y., F. H. Chiew, L. Zhang, and H. Li. 2009. “Use of remotely sensed actual evapotranspiration to improve rainfall–runoff modeling in Southeast Australia.” J. Hydrometeorol. 10 (4): 969–980. https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JHM1061.1.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 28 • Issue 11 • November 2023
Copyright
© 2023 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Oct 18, 2022
Accepted: Jun 5, 2023
Published online: Aug 26, 2023
Published in print: Nov 1, 2023
Discussion open until: Jan 26, 2024
ASCE Technical Topics:
- Computer models
- Engineering fundamentals
- Evaporation
- Evapotranspiration
- Flow (fluid dynamics)
- Fluid dynamics
- Fluid mechanics
- Geomechanics
- Geotechnical engineering
- Hydrologic data
- Hydrologic engineering
- Hydrologic models
- Hydrology
- Model accuracy
- Models (by type)
- River engineering
- River systems
- Soil mechanics
- Soil properties
- Soil water
- Streamflow
- Water and water resources
- Watersheds
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.