[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Article Types

Countries / Regions

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Search Results (2,296)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = rainfall estimates

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
24 pages, 12445 KiB  
Article
Prediction of Flood Processes Based on General Unit Hydrograph
by Nuo Xu, Yingjun Sun, Yizhi Sun, Zhilin Sun and Fang Geng
Water 2025, 17(2), 258; https://doi.org/10.3390/w17020258 - 17 Jan 2025
Abstract
The general unit hydrograph (GUH), recently established by Guo, represents the most advanced hydrograph model today, but how to implement it with hydrologic data is another story. In this work, an effective initial value-based method for estimating the parameters in the GUH model [...] Read more.
The general unit hydrograph (GUH), recently established by Guo, represents the most advanced hydrograph model today, but how to implement it with hydrologic data is another story. In this work, an effective initial value-based method for estimating the parameters in the GUH model is proposed and applied to the analysis of flood processes. In contrast to the flood-rainfall united fitting method, which heavily depends on the flood records and has a broad range of parameter variations, which makes it practically intractable, the initial value-based method enables the calculation of model parameters directly from the measured rainstorm data and greatly enriches the discharge dataset so that more accurate prediction of flood processes becomes achievable. From the data collected from several watersheds, we find that smaller-shape parameters usually indicate a multi-peak flood process, and the rainfall patterns have a significant impact on flood peaks. These results provide a reliable approach for the prediction of floods in streams with scarce discharge data. Additionally, it is observed that the peak time lags have a notable increase from the southwest to the northeast of Zhejiang. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) GUH with different shape parameters; (<b>b</b>) IUH with different shape parameters; (<b>c</b>) GUH with different growth constants; (<b>d</b>) IUH with different growth constants.</p>
Full article ">Figure 1 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) GUH with different shape parameters; (<b>b</b>) IUH with different shape parameters; (<b>c</b>) GUH with different growth constants; (<b>d</b>) IUH with different growth constants.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Application of GUH to storm at Hongjiata station (HJT) in July 1966.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The theoretical flood process at Hongjiata station (HJT) in July 1966.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Design storm hyetograph and flood process for Hongjiata station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1969–1971, (<b>b</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1972–1973, (<b>c</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1973–1975, (<b>d</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1977, (<b>e</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1981–1982, (<b>f</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1984–1987, (<b>g</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1989–1990, (<b>h</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1992–1994, (<b>i</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1997–1999, (<b>j</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2004–2009, (<b>k</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2012–2015, (<b>l</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2019–2021.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1969–1971, (<b>b</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1972–1973, (<b>c</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1973–1975, (<b>d</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1977, (<b>e</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1981–1982, (<b>f</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1984–1987, (<b>g</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1989–1990, (<b>h</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1992–1994, (<b>i</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1997–1999, (<b>j</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2004–2009, (<b>k</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2012–2015, (<b>l</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2019–2021.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1969–1971, (<b>b</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1972–1973, (<b>c</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1973–1975, (<b>d</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1977, (<b>e</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1981–1982, (<b>f</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1984–1987, (<b>g</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1989–1990, (<b>h</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1992–1994, (<b>i</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1997–1999, (<b>j</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2004–2009, (<b>k</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2012–2015, (<b>l</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2019–2021.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1969–1971, (<b>b</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1972–1973, (<b>c</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1973–1975, (<b>d</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1977, (<b>e</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1981–1982, (<b>f</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1984–1987, (<b>g</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1989–1990, (<b>h</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1992–1994, (<b>i</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 1997–1999, (<b>j</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2004–2009, (<b>k</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2012–2015, (<b>l</b>) Application of GUH at Hongjiata station (HJT) during 2019–2021.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) GUH at Jiangjia station; (<b>b</b>) GUH at Zhudaogang station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparison between observed and predicted values.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>P-III distribution of annual maximum discharges at Jiangjia station during 1963–1989.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>P-III distribution of annual maximum discharge at Jiangjia station during 1962–2021.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>P-III distribution of annual maximum discharge at Zhudaogang station during 1983–2007.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>P-III distribution of annual maximum discharge at Zhudaogang station during 1957–2021.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Rainstorm types 1–7.</p>
Full article ">
8 pages, 1000 KiB  
Proceeding Paper
Extreme Rainfall Analysis Including Seasonality in Athens, Greece
by Konstantinos Vantas and Athanasios Loukas
Environ. Earth Sci. Proc. 2025, 32(1), 1; https://doi.org/10.3390/eesp2025032001 - 15 Jan 2025
Viewed by 96
Abstract
Extreme rainfall analysis is essential for accurate flood hazard assessment. Traditional approaches, such as the use of annual maxima, may overlook seasonal variations and lead to underestimated precipitation extremes, compromising effective flood risk management strategies. This study applies a point process model to [...] Read more.
Extreme rainfall analysis is essential for accurate flood hazard assessment. Traditional approaches, such as the use of annual maxima, may overlook seasonal variations and lead to underestimated precipitation extremes, compromising effective flood risk management strategies. This study applies a point process model to uninterrupted daily rainfall records (1901–2023) from the National Observatory of Athens meteorological station in Thiseion. This method analyzes both the frequency of exceedances above a given threshold and the values of those exceedances, incorporating seasonality into the modeling process. Preliminary analysis using annual maxima revealed no statistically significant trend but indicated clear monthly seasonality in precipitation extremes. By incorporating seasonality, the point process method yielded estimates up to 22% higher than those obtained using traditional annual maxima approaches, such as those employed in Greece’s National Flood Risk Management Plans. These findings highlight the need for a revision of current methodologies, which could significantly impact flood risk assessments and management strategies. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Daily precipitation values recorded in Athens, Greece.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Annual maximum daily precipitation values recorded in Athens, Greece. Smooth lines are marked in blue, and the gray band marks the standard error variance produced by means of Local Polynomial Regression Fitting [<a href="#B19-eesp-32-00001" class="html-bibr">19</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Daily precipitation values recorded in Athens, with the effective 100-year return level of the non-stationary PP model with seasonality in the location and shape parameters.</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 7022 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of the Sensitivity of the Weather Research and Forecasting Model to Changes in Physical Parameterizations During a Torrential Precipitation Event of the El Niño Costero 2017 in Peru
by Alejandro Sánchez Oliva, Matilde García-Valdecasas Ojeda and Raúl Arasa Agudo
Water 2025, 17(2), 209; https://doi.org/10.3390/w17020209 - 14 Jan 2025
Viewed by 333
Abstract
This study evaluates the sensitivity of the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF-ARW) model in its version 4.3.3 during different experiments on a torrential precipitation event associated with the 2017 El Niño Costero in Peru. The results are compared with two reference datasets: precipitation [...] Read more.
This study evaluates the sensitivity of the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF-ARW) model in its version 4.3.3 during different experiments on a torrential precipitation event associated with the 2017 El Niño Costero in Peru. The results are compared with two reference datasets: precipitation estimations from CHIRPS satellite data and SENAMHI meteorological station values. The event, which had significant economic and social impacts, is simulated using two nested domains with resolutions of 9 km (d01) and 3 km (d02). A total of 22 experiments are conducted, resulting from the combination of two planetary boundary layer (PBL) schemes: Yonsei University (YSU) and Mellor–Yamada–Janjic (MYJ), with five cumulus parameterization schemes: Betts–Miller–Janjic (BMJ), Grell–Devenyi (GD), Grell–Freitas (GF), Kain–Fritsch (KF), and New Tiedtke (NT). Additionally, the effect of turning off cumulus parameterization in the inner domain (d02) or in both (d01 and d02) is explored. The results show that the YSU scheme generally provides better results than the MYJ scheme in detecting the precipitation patterns observed during the event. Furthermore, it is concluded that turning off cumulus parameterization in both domains produces satisfactory results for certain regions when it is combined with the YSU PBL scheme. However, the KF cumulus parameterization is considered the most effective for intense precipitation events in this region, although it tends to overestimate precipitation in high mountain areas. In contrast, for lighter rains, combinations of the YSU PBL scheme with the GD or NT parameterization show a superior performance. It is worth nothing that for all experiments here used, there is a clear underestimation in terms of precipitation, except in high mountain regions, where the model tends to overestimate rainfall. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The WRF model domains: the outer domain (d01) with a 9 km spatial resolution and the inner domain (d02) with a 3 km spatial resolution. The locations of the 20 selected meteorological stations are shown as purple dots.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Accumulated precipitation of the event for simulations under the YSU PBL. The first row shows the accumulated precipitation in CHIRPS (reference data), and from the second row onward, each row corresponds to a cumulus parameterization. The left column shows the results for d01. The center column shows parameterization in both domains. The right column shows parameterization in d01 and the explicit resolution in d02.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>As <a href="#water-17-00209-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a>, but for MYJ PBL.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The 3-day accumulated precipitation for simulations with an explicitly resolved CU in both domains and for the two PBLs evaluated.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Relative bias (%) of experiments completed with YSU PBL when compared to CHIRPS.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Comparison of the relative bias (%) of the experiments for the d02 domain with respect to CHIRPS using the MYJ PBL.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Relative bias (%) for both PBLs with the explicit resolution of the model in both domains.</p>
Full article ">
17 pages, 3556 KiB  
Article
Quantification of Soil–Water Erosion Using the RUSLE Method in the Mékrou Watershed (Middle Niger River)
by Rachid Abdourahamane Attoubounou, Hamidou Diawara, Ralf Ludwig and Julien Adounkpe
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2025, 14(1), 28; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi14010028 - 14 Jan 2025
Viewed by 296
Abstract
Despite nearly a century of research on water-related issues, water erosion remains one of the greatest threats to soil health and soil ecosystem services around the world. Yet, to date, data on water erosion needed to develop mitigation strategies are scarce, especially in [...] Read more.
Despite nearly a century of research on water-related issues, water erosion remains one of the greatest threats to soil health and soil ecosystem services around the world. Yet, to date, data on water erosion needed to develop mitigation strategies are scarce, especially in the Sahelian regions. The current study therefore sets out to estimate annual soil losses caused by water erosion and to analyze trends over the period of 1981–2020 in the Mékrou watershed, located in the Middle Niger river sub-basin in West Africa. The Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation, remote sensing, and the Geographic Information System (GIS) were deployed in this study. Several types of data were used, including rainfall data, sourced from meteorological stations and reanalysis datasets, which capture the temporal variability of erosive forces. Soil properties, including texture and organic matter content, were derived from FAO global soil databases to assess soil erodibility. High-resolution digital elevation models (30 m) provided detailed topographic information, crucial for calculating slope length and steepness factors. Land use and land cover data were extracted from satellite imagery, enabling the analysis of vegetation cover and anthropogenic impacts over four decades. By integrating and treating these data, this study reveals that the estimated average annual amount of water erosion in the Mékrou watershed is 6.49 t/ha/yr over 1981–2020. The dynamics of the ten-year average are highly variable, with a minimum of 3.45 t/ha/yr between 1981 and 1990, and a maximum of 8.50 t/ha/yr between 1991 and 2000. Even though these average soil losses in the Mékrou basin are below the tolerable threshold of 10 t/ha/yr, mitigation actions are needed for prevention. In addition, the spatial dynamics of water erosion are noticeably heterogeneous. The study reveals that 72.7% of the surface area of the Mékrou watershed is subject to slight water erosion below the threshold, compared with 27.3%, particularly in the mountainous south-western part, which is subject to intense erosion above the threshold. This research is the first study of soil erosion quantification with the RUSLE method and GIS in the Mékrou watershed, and fills a critical knowledge gap of the water erosion in this watershed, providing insights into erosion dynamics and supporting future sustainable land management strategies in vulnerable Sahelian landscapes. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Mékrou watershed in Middle Niger.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The workflow of the study in the Mékrou watershed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>A soil map of the Mékrou watershed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Yearly average precipitation in the Mékrou watershed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The temporal evolution of the erosivity factor (R) in the Mékrou watershed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The spatial distribution of water erosion factors (R, K, LS, C and P) in the Mékrou basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The temporal dynamics of water erosion at decadal intervals within the Mékrou watershed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The spatiotemporal dynamics of water erosion within the Mékrou watershed.</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 17962 KiB  
Article
Conversion of 10 min Rain Rate Time Series into 1 min Time Series: Theory, Experimental Results, and Application in Satellite Communications
by Emilio Matricciani and Carlo Riva
Appl. Sci. 2025, 15(2), 743; https://doi.org/10.3390/app15020743 - 13 Jan 2025
Viewed by 628
Abstract
We propose a semi-empirical method—based on a filtered Markov process—to convert 10 min rain rate time series into 1 min time series, i.e., quasi-instantaneous rainfall—the latter to be used as input to the synthetic storm technique, which is a very reliable tool for [...] Read more.
We propose a semi-empirical method—based on a filtered Markov process—to convert 10 min rain rate time series into 1 min time series, i.e., quasi-instantaneous rainfall—the latter to be used as input to the synthetic storm technique, which is a very reliable tool for calculating rain attenuation time series in satellite communication systems or for estimating runoff, erosion, pollutant transport, and other applications in hydrology. To develop the method, we used a very large data bank of 1 min rain rate time series collected in several sites with different climatic conditions. The experimental and simulated 1 min rain rate time series agree very well. Afterward, we used them to simulate rain attenuation time series at 20.7 GHz, in 35.5° slant paths to geostationary satellites. The two simulated annual rain attenuation probability distributions show very small differences. We conclude that the rain rate conversion method is very reliable. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Technologies in Optical and Microwave Transmission)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p><math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (cyan) and corresponding <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (magenta). Both rain rates are expressed in mm/h. Spino d’Adda, 20 October 2000; the event starts at 10:32.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Histograms of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> in the ranges of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> <mo>–</mo> <mn>2</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm/h of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (<b>left panel</b>) and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>2</mn> <mo>–</mo> <mn>4</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm/h (<b>right panel</b>) of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Histograms of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> in the ranges of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>4</mn> <mo>–</mo> <mn>6</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm/h of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (<b>left panel</b>) and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>6</mn> <mo>–</mo> <mn>8</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm/h (<b>right panel</b>) of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Histograms of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> in the ranges of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>8</mn> <mo>–</mo> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm/h of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (<b>left panel</b>) and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> <mo>–</mo> <mn>15</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm/h (<b>right panel</b>) of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Histograms of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> in the ranges of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>15</mn> <mo>–</mo> <mn>20</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm/h of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (<b>left panel</b>) and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>20</mn> <mo>–</mo> <mn>30</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm/h (<b>right panel</b>) of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Histograms of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> in the ranges of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mn>30</mn> <mo>–</mo> <mn>40</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm/h of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (<b>left panel</b>) and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>&gt;</mo> <mn>40</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> mm/h (<b>right panel</b>) of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>10</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Experimental <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (mm/h) (blue, original) and simulated <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> <mo>,</mo> <mi>s</mi> <mi>i</mi> <mi>m</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> (mm/h) time series (black, simul). Left: low-intensity rain rate event. Right panel: high-intensity rain rate event. The 10 min quantity of water is conserved.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Mean value (<b>left panel</b>, mm/h) and standard deviation (<b>right panel</b>, mm/h) of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>ε</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> versus <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>f</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>c</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Example of 1 min rain rate time series, measured (blue line, original) and simulated (red line, gener), after filtering and water conservation. (<b>Left panel</b>): a low rain rate event. (<b>Right panel</b>): a high-intensity rain rate event (see also <a href="#applsci-15-00743-f007" class="html-fig">Figure 7</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Probability distribution (PD) that the 1 min rain rate in abscissa is exceeded in the experimental data <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>; blue line (original), and in the simulated 1 min data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line (simul).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Scatterplots of mean values (<b>left panel</b>), standard deviations (<b>central panel</b>), and correlation coefficients (<b>right panel</b>) between the values of the sites in <a href="#applsci-15-00743-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a> and Spino d’Adda. Gera Lario: green; Fucino: blue; Madrid: cyan; Prague: yellow; Tampa: red; White Sands: magenta; Vancouver: black.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p><b>Gera Lario.</b> Probability distribution that the 1 min rain rate in abscissa is exceeded in the experimental data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, blue line, and in the simulated 1 min data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p><b>Fucino.</b> Probability distribution that the 1 min rain rate in abscissa is exceeded in the experimental data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, blue line, and in the simulated 1 min data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p><b>Madrid.</b> Probability distribution that the 1 min rain rate in abscissa is exceeded in the experimental data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, blue line, and in the simulated 1 min data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p><b>Prague.</b> Probability distribution that the 1 min rain rate in abscissa is exceeded in the experimental data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, blue line, and in the simulated 1 min data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p><b>Tampa.</b> Probability distribution that the 1 min rain rate in abscissa is exceeded in the experimental data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, blue line, and in the simulated 1 min data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p><b>White Sands.</b> Probability distribution that the 1 min rain rate in abscissa is exceeded in the experimental data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, blue line, and in the simulated 1 min data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p><b>Vancouver.</b> Probability distribution that the 1 min rain rate in abscissa is exceeded in the experimental data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, blue line, and in the simulated 1 min data, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>R</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Average annual probability distribution <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math>—namely, the fraction of time of a year—that the rain attenuation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> (dB) in abscissa is exceeded, estimated with the SST. Cyan line: experimental <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>; magenta line: simulated <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p><b>Gera Lario.</b> Average annual probability distribution <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> that the rain attenuation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> (dB) in abscissa is exceeded, estimated with the SST; blue line: experimental <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line: simulated <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional rain rate PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 21
<p><b>Fucino.</b> Average annual probability distribution <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> that the rain attenuation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> (dB) in abscissa is exceeded, estimated with the SST; blue line: experimental <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line: simulated <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional rain rate PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 22
<p><b>Madrid.</b> Average annual probability distribution <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> that the rain attenuation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> (dB) in abscissa is exceeded, estimated with the SST; blue line: experimental <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line: simulated <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional rain rate PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 23
<p><b>Prague.</b> Average annual probability distribution <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> that the rain attenuation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> (dB) in abscissa is exceeded, estimated with the SST; blue line: experimental <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line: simulated <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional rain rate PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 24
<p><b>Tampa.</b> Average annual probability distribution <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> that the rain attenuation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> (dB) in abscissa is exceeded, estimated with the SST; blue line: experimental <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line: simulated <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional rain rate PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 25
<p><b>White Sands.</b> Average annual probability distribution <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> that the rain attenuation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> (dB) in abscissa is exceeded, estimated with the SST; blue line: experimental <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line: simulated <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional rain rate PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 26
<p><b>Vancouver.</b> Average annual probability distribution <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mfenced separators="|"> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </mfenced> </mrow> </semantics></math> that the rain attenuation <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>A</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> (dB) in abscissa is exceeded, estimated with the SST; blue line: experimental <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>, black line: simulated <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>R</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>t</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>. <b>Left panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using local values of the conditional rain rate PDFs. <b>Right panel</b>: <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> is obtained by using Spino d’Adda conditional PDFs (<a href="#applsci-15-00743-t002" class="html-table">Table 2</a>).</p>
Full article ">
32 pages, 11641 KiB  
Article
The Performance of a High-Resolution WRF Modelling System in the Simulation of Severe Tropical Cyclones over the Bay of Bengal Using the IMDAA Regional Reanalysis Dataset
by Thatiparthi Koteshwaramma, Kuvar Satya Singh and Sridhara Nayak
Climate 2025, 13(1), 17; https://doi.org/10.3390/cli13010017 - 13 Jan 2025
Viewed by 315
Abstract
Extremely severe cyclonic storms over the North Indian Ocean increased by approximately 10% during the past 30 years. The climatological characteristics of tropical cyclones for 38 years were assessed over the Bay of Bengal (BoB). A total of 24 ESCSs formed over the [...] Read more.
Extremely severe cyclonic storms over the North Indian Ocean increased by approximately 10% during the past 30 years. The climatological characteristics of tropical cyclones for 38 years were assessed over the Bay of Bengal (BoB). A total of 24 ESCSs formed over the BoB, having their genesis in the southeast BoB, and the intensity and duration of these storms have increased in recent times. The Advanced Research version of the Weather Research and Forecasting (ARW) model is utilized to simulate the five extremely severe cyclonic storms (ESCSs) over the BoB during the past two decades using the Indian Monsoon Data Assimilation and Analysis (IMDAA) data. The initial and lateral boundary conditions are derived from the IMDAA datasets with a horizontal resolution of 0.12° × 0.12°. Five ESCSs from the past two decades were considered: Sidr 2007, Phailin 2013, Hudhud 2014, Fani 2019, and Amphan 2020. The model was integrated up to 96 h using double-nested domains of 12 km and 4 km. Model performance was evaluated using the 4 km results, compared with the available observational datasets, including the best-fit data from the India Meteorological Department (IMD), the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) satellite, and the Doppler Weather Radar (DWR). The results indicated that IMDAA provided accurate forecasts for Fani, Hudhud, and Phailin regarding the track, intensity, and mean sea level pressure, aligning well with the IMD observational datasets. Statistical evaluation was performed to estimate the model skills using Mean Absolute Error (MAE), the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), the Probability of Detection (POD), the Brier Score, and the Critical Successive Index (CSI). The calculated mean absolute maximum sustained wind speed errors ranged from 8.4 m/s to 10.6 m/s from day 1 to day 4, while mean track errors ranged from 100 km to 496 km for a day. The results highlighted the prediction of rainfall, maximum reflectivity, and the associated structure of the storms. The predicted 24 h accumulated rainfall is well captured by the model with a high POD (96% for the range of 35.6–64.4 mm/day) and a good correlation (65–97%) for the majority of storms. Similarly, the Brier Score showed a value of 0.01, indicating the high performance of the model forecast for maximum surface winds. The Critical Successive Index was 0.6, indicating the moderate model performance in the prediction of tracks. It is evident from the statistical analysis that the performance of the model is good in forecasting storm structure, intensity and rainfall. However, the IMDAA data have certain limitations in predicting the tracks due to inadequate representation of the large-scale circulations, necessitating improvement. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Study area map showing topography and the configured domains. The domains have horizontal resolutions of 12 km and 4 km, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Climatological analysis of tropical cyclones over the Bay of Bengal (BoB) during 1982–2020, representing: (<b>a</b>) different categories of TCs and their frequency (CS: cyclonic storm, SCS: severe cyclonic storm, VSCS: very severe cyclonic storm, ESCS: extremely severe cyclonic storm, SUCS: super cyclonic storm), (<b>b</b>) genesis locations of ESCSs (Marked in Red), (<b>c</b>) hotspots of TCs genesis locations, (<b>d</b>) tracks of ESCSs, (<b>e</b>) rapid intensification of ESCSs (red ovals—Amphan, 18 May 2020 at 00UTC; Fani, 30 April 2019 at 03UTC; Hudhud, 11 October 2014 at 06UTC; Phailin, 10 October 2013 at 06UTC; Sidr, 13 November 2007 at 00UTC), and (<b>f</b>) trend analysis of ESCS duration and intensity (Source: [<a href="#B5-climate-13-00017" class="html-bibr">5</a>,<a href="#B22-climate-13-00017" class="html-bibr">22</a>]).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Synoptic features in terms of atmospheric conditions and large-scale flows, including geopotential height (in contours), relative humidity (shaded), and wind vectors at 850 hPa from ERA5 analysis at 00 UTC during the life cycle of cyclonic storms: (<b>a1</b>–<b>a5</b>) Amphan; (<b>b1</b>–<b>b5</b>) Fani; (<b>c1</b>–<b>c5</b>) Hudhud; (<b>d1</b>–<b>d5</b>) Phailin; (<b>e1</b>–<b>e5</b>) Sidr.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Initial low-pressure vortices of five ESCSs: (<b>a</b>) Amphan, (<b>b</b>) Fani, (<b>c</b>) Hudhud, (<b>d</b>) Phailin, and (<b>e</b>) Sidr—derived from the IMDAA dataset were compared with the IMD best-fit track data, indicating the location in the terms of the weather symbol.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Model-simulated tracks of five ESCSs: (<b>a</b>) Amphan, (<b>b</b>) Fani, (<b>c</b>) Hudhud, (<b>d</b>) Phailin, and (<b>e</b>) Sidr along with IMD best-fit tracks.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Temporal evaluation of along- and across-track errors for five ESCSs over the Bay of Bengal.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Temporal variation in model-simulated MSW (in m/s), (<b>a</b>) Amphan, (<b>b</b>) Fani, (<b>c</b>) Hudhud, (<b>d</b>) Phailin, and (<b>e</b>) Sidr along with the IMD best-fit track dataset.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Simulated wind fields (m/s) during intensification of ESCSs: (<b>a</b>) Amphan; (<b>b</b>) Fani; (<b>c</b>) Hudhud; (<b>d</b>) Phailin; and (<b>e</b>) Sidr.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Simulated wind fields (m/s) before landfall of ESCSs: (<b>a</b>) Amphan; (<b>b</b>) Fani; (<b>c</b>) Hudhud; (<b>d</b>) Phailin; and (<b>e</b>) Sidr.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Wind speed changes in 24 h (in m/s) for five ESCSs from model simulations and the IMD best-fit track dataset: (<b>a</b>) Amphan, (<b>b</b>) Fani, (<b>c</b>) Hudhud, (<b>d</b>) Phailin, and (<b>e</b>) Sidr.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Temporal variation in model-simulated central sea level pressure (CSLP) for five ESCSs: (<b>a</b>) Amphan, (<b>b</b>) Fani, (<b>c</b>) Hudhud, (<b>d</b>) Phailin, and (<b>e</b>) Sidr, along with the IMD best-fit track dataset.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Taylor diagrams of MSW (<b>a</b>–<b>e</b>) and CSLP (<b>f</b>–<b>j</b>) for five ESCSs [(<b>a</b>,<b>f</b>) Amphan, (<b>b</b>,<b>g</b>) Fani, (<b>c</b>,<b>h</b>) Hudhud, (<b>d</b>,<b>i</b>) Phailin and (<b>e</b>,<b>j</b>) Sidr].</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Accumulated rainfall (in mm/day) over 24 h for the five ESCSs presented as (<b>a</b>–<b>e</b>, <b>left</b> panel) model-simulated, and (<b>f</b>–<b>j</b>, <b>right</b> panel) TRMM rainfall data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Temperature anomaly for five ESCSs, namely (<b>a</b>) Amphan at 00 UTC on 19 May 2020, (<b>b</b>) Fani at 03 UTC on 2 May 2019, (<b>c</b>) Hudhud at 12 UTC on 11 October 2014, (<b>d</b>) Phailin at 12 UTC on 11 October 2013, and (<b>e</b>) Sidr at 03 UTC on 15 November 2007 obtained from model-forecasted (<b>left</b> panel) and compared with satellite observations (<b>f</b>–<b>j</b>, <b>right</b> panel), respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Simulated maximum reflectivity (in dBZ) for the Hudhud cyclone at (<b>a</b>) 1500 UTC, (<b>b</b>) 1800 UTC, and (<b>c</b>) 2100 UTC on 11 October 2014 (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) and are compared with the DWR images of Vishakhapatnam (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>).</p>
Full article ">
12 pages, 2753 KiB  
Article
A Nonstationary Daily and Hourly Analysis of the Extreme Rainfall Frequency Considering Climate Teleconnection in Coastal Cities of the United States
by Lei Yan, Yuhan Zhang, Mengjie Zhang and Upmanu Lall
Atmosphere 2025, 16(1), 75; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos16010075 - 11 Jan 2025
Viewed by 321
Abstract
The nonstationarity of extreme precipitation is now well established in the presence of climate change and low-frequency variability. Consequently, the implications for urban flooding, for which there are not long flooding records, need to be understood better. The vulnerability is especially high in [...] Read more.
The nonstationarity of extreme precipitation is now well established in the presence of climate change and low-frequency variability. Consequently, the implications for urban flooding, for which there are not long flooding records, need to be understood better. The vulnerability is especially high in coastal cities, where the flat terrain and impervious cover present an additional challenge. In this paper, we estimate the time-varying probability distributions for hourly and daily extreme precipitation using the Generalized Additive Model for Location Scale and Shape (GAMLSS), employing different climate indices, such as Atlantic Multi-Decadal Oscillation (AMO), the El Niño 3.4 SST Index (ENSO), Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), the Western Hemisphere Warm Pool (WHWP) and other covariates. Applications to selected coastal cities in the USA are considered. Overall, the AMO, PDO and WHWP are the dominant factors influencing the extreme rainfall. The nonstationary model outperforms the stationary model in 92% of cases during the fitting period. However, in terms of its predictive performance over the next 5 years, the ST model achieves a higher log-likelihood in 86% of cases. The implications for the time-varying design rainfall in coastal areas are considered, whether this corresponds to a structural design or the duration of a contract for a financial instrument for risk securitization. The opportunity to use these time-varying probabilistic models for adaptive flood risk management in a coastal city context is discussed. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The geographical locations of the selected coastal stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Trend analysis of the annual maximum daily rainfall of selected stations. The blue dotted lines are the observations, and the red line is the estimated trend.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Trend analysis of the annual maximum hourly rainfall of selected stations. The blue dotted lines are the observations, and the red line is the estimated trend.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Difference in BIC between NS and ST models, i.e., BIC_NS—BIC_ST, during the fitting period (<b>a</b>); difference in log-likelihood between NS and ST models, i.e., (log-likelihood_NS)—(log-likelihood_ST) (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Stationary and nonstationary daily design rainfall and associated confidence intervals estimated for the years 1990 and 2021, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Stationary and nonstationary hourly design rainfall and associated confidence intervals estimated for the years 1990 and 2021, respectively.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 5152 KiB  
Article
Assessment of Water Retention and Absorption of Organic Mulch Under Simulated Rainfall for Soil and Water Conservation
by Iug Lopes, João L. M. P. de Lima, Abelardo A. A. Montenegro and Ailton Alves de Carvalho
Soil Syst. 2025, 9(1), 4; https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems9010004 - 10 Jan 2025
Viewed by 362
Abstract
The use of organic mulch as a natural practice to enhance water retention and absorption is underexplored, highlighting the need for a deeper understanding of its effectiveness under varying conditions. The aim of this study was to investigate the process of interception, retention, [...] Read more.
The use of organic mulch as a natural practice to enhance water retention and absorption is underexplored, highlighting the need for a deeper understanding of its effectiveness under varying conditions. The aim of this study was to investigate the process of interception, retention, and absorption of rainwater by different types, sizes, and densities of some organic mulch covers. Six organic mulches of various sizes were used, all largely available in the Brazilian semiarid: coconut leaf (cc), cashew leaf (ca), elephant grass (el), corn leaf (co), Brachiaria grass (br), and sugar cane leaf (su), under simulated rainfall conditions. The experimental scheme consisted of a factorial of six types of mulches, three sizes (50, 100, and 200 mm), and four densities (1, 2, 4, and 8 t ha−1). Water adsorption and retention curves were constructed, and the interception capacity of different vegetation materials was estimated. Analysis of variance, Tukey Test, Regression polynomial, and Principal Components Analysis were applied. It was observed that increasing density systematically led to an increase in water retention and absorption. For 8 t ha−1 the values were 11 to 23% for water retention and 7 to 16% for water absorption of the gross rainfall depth. When comparing 8 t ha−1 and 2 t ha−1 densities, rainfall retention and absorption increased more than 100%. Higher values were obtained for cashew and Brachiaria grass, improving water retention and cashew leaves for absorption. Coconut leaves promoted only 83% retention and 67% water absorption, when compared to the cashew leaf and Brachiaria grass. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Land Use and Management on Soil Properties and Processes)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Photographs of coconut leaf (cc), cashew leaf (ca), elephant grass (el), corn leaf (co), <span class="html-italic">Brachiaria</span> grass (br), and sugar cane leaf (su).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>(<b>a</b>) Sketch of the laboratory setup: 1—constant head reservoir; 2—valves; 3—pump; 4—manometer; 5—oscillating nozzle; 6—weighing device; 7—mulch support; and 8—support structure of the rainfall simulator. (<b>b</b>) View of the measuring device.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Sketch with variables involved in water retention and absorption processes in time for a given organic mulching cover for a rainfall with 10 min duration. α—angle referring to initial retention intensity and ∆—drained seepage depth. Tp is rainfall duration and Td is drainage time after rainfall. A is the maximum water retention value and B is the stabilized value of retained water.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Water retention and absorption by the different mulch covers for different mulch sizes and densities: coconut leaf (CC), cashew leaf (CA), elephant grass (EL), corn leaf (CO), <span class="html-italic">Brachiaria</span> grass (BR), and sugar cane leaf (SU) (see <a href="#soilsystems-09-00004-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>). In the graphs, vertical scales change with mulch density.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Initial water retention angle α (°) for 10 min after rainfall start, and 5 min after rainfall stop as a function of mulch type (<b>a</b>), size (<b>b</b>), and density (<b>c</b>) for coconut leaf (CC), cashew leaf (CA), elephant grass (EL), corn leaf (CO), <span class="html-italic">brachiaria</span> grass (BR), and sugar cane leaf (SU). The letters above the columns represent the statistical result of the Tukey test.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Water retention (after 10 min) and absorption (after 15 min). Depth in mm (on <b>top</b>) and as a percentage of rainfall (on <b>bottom</b>) for all mulch types (all mulch sizes and all densities). In the figure, the red asterisks correspond to outlier values. The letters above the columns represent the statistical result of the Tukey test.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Depth retained (after 10 min) and absorbed (after 15 min), in mm (<b>top</b>) and as percentage of rainfall (<b>bottom</b>), for different mulch sizes (all mulch types and all densities). In the figure, the red asterisks correspond to outlier values. The significant regression coefficients are for <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05 (*) (black).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Depth retained (after 10 min) and absorbed (after 15 min) in mm (<b>top</b>) and as percentage of rainfall (<b>bottom</b>) for mulch densities (all mulch type and all sizes).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Difference in water retention between 10 min and 15 min depths (5 min after rainfall ends) as a function of mulch type, size, and density. In the figure, the red asterisks correspond to outlier values. The letters above the columns represent the statistical result of the Tukey test. The significant regression coefficients are for <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05 (*) (black).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Principal Component Analysis for absorption and retention depths (<b>a</b>) considering separately the variables densities (1, 2, 4, 8 t ha<sup>−1</sup> mulch) (<b>b</b>), sizes (200, 100, 50 mm) (<b>c</b>), types (coconut leaf (CC), cashew leaf (CA), elephant grass (EL), corn leaf (CO), <span class="html-italic">Brachiaria</span> grass (BR), and sugar cane leaf (SU)) (<b>d</b>), and type with their sizes (<b>e</b>), distributed by clusters.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Top: rainfall interception depth for 1, 2, 4, and 8 t ha<sup>−1</sup> mulch densities and for 50, 100, and 200 mm mulching sizes ((<b>a</b>), (<b>b</b>), (<b>c</b>), respectively). Bottom: drainage for 1, 2, 4, and 8 t ha<sup>−1</sup> mulch densities and 200, 100, and 50 mm mulching sizes ((<b>d</b>), (<b>e</b>), (<b>f</b>), respectively).</p>
Full article ">
25 pages, 7723 KiB  
Article
Multi-Criteria Assessment of Flood Risk on Railroads Using a Machine Learning Approach: A Case Study of Railroads in Minas Gerais
by Fernanda Oliveira de Sousa, Victor Andre Ariza Flores, Christhian Santana Cunha, Sandra Oda and Hostilio Xavier Ratton Neto
Infrastructures 2025, 10(1), 12; https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures10010012 - 8 Jan 2025
Viewed by 682
Abstract
In a climate change scenario where extreme precipitation events occur more frequently and intensely, risk assessment plays a critical role in ensuring the safety and operational efficiency of facilities. This case study uses a combination of the multi-criteria analysis approach and hydrological studies [...] Read more.
In a climate change scenario where extreme precipitation events occur more frequently and intensely, risk assessment plays a critical role in ensuring the safety and operational efficiency of facilities. This case study uses a combination of the multi-criteria analysis approach and hydrological studies that use machine learning algorithms to simulate new rainfall events in order to estimate the risk of flooding on railroads. Risk variables, including terrain, drainage capability, accumulated flow, and land use and land cover, will be weighed using the multicriteria approach. A methodical evaluation of the most vulnerable locations on the railroad network will be possible thanks to the analysis of these parameters based on the geographic information system (GIS) approach. In the meantime, historical precipitation, flow, and hydrological balance data will be used to calibrate and validate hydrological models. The database required for the machine learning model can be created with these hydrological data. The research regions are situated in the densely rail-networked state of Minas Gerais. The geographical and climatic diversity of Minas Gerais makes it the perfect place to test and validate the suggested approaches. The models evaluated included linear regression, random forest, decision tree, and support vector machines. Among the evaluated models, Linear Regression emerged as the best-performing model with an R2 value of 0.999998, a mean squared error (MSE) of 0.018672, and a low tendency to overfitting (0.000011). Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of the Brazilian Railroad Network, highlighting the state of Minas Gerais and the main railroads in the region. On the map on the left, the Brazilian rail network is represented by the red lines, covering several states in the country. The state of Minas Gerais is highlighted in green, indicating its location and geographical boundaries. The area of interest (AOI) is outlined in gray on the map on the right, showing the specific region of study within Minas Gerais. The main railroads in Minas Gerais include the Vitória-Minas Railroad (EFVM), represented by the yellow line, the Ferrovia Centro-Atlântica S.A. (FCA), represented by the blue line, Minas Rio São Paulo Logística S. A. (MRS), represented by the green line, and Rumo Malha Central (RMC), represented by the orange line. The detail on the right of the figure shows an expanded view of the railroads within the study area in Minas Gerais. All data used to create this map are available in reference [<a href="#B22-infrastructures-10-00012" class="html-bibr">22</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Research methodology flowchart.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Step-by-step workflow for implementing a machine learning system applied to predicting flow rates and monitoring drainage systems.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Step-by-step workflow for processing geographic information.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Erosion of the Centro Atlântica railroad in Lavras, Minas Gerais, caused by strong rainfall in January 2011, damaging around 30 m of the track (Credits: Circuito Ferroviário Vale Verde. Available in Reference [<a href="#B46-infrastructures-10-00012" class="html-bibr">46</a>]). Figure (<b>b</b>): Erosion on a railroad in Araguari, Minas Gerais, in January 2022 (Credits: G1 Globo. Available in Reference [<a href="#B47-infrastructures-10-00012" class="html-bibr">47</a>]). The images show two sections of a railroad track damaged by significant erosion. In both cases, the erosion has removed a large amount of pavement layers from under the tracks, leaving them without adequate support.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>This figure shows the maps and analyses relevant to the multi-criteria analysis of flooding in the study area. The risks are subdivided into four levels, where very-low-risk areas are in green, low-risk areas are in yellow, moderate-risk areas are in orange, and high-risk areas are in red. Subfigure (<b>a</b>) shows the elevation map in meters, with the highest elevations in red and the lowest in green. Subfigure (<b>b</b>) illustrates the slope risk. Subfigure (<b>c</b>) shows the risk of cumulative flow. Subfigure (<b>d</b>) shows the land use risk. Finally, subfigure (<b>e</b>) shows the multi-criteria flood risk analysis, combining all of the previous factors in a 2 km area of influence around the railroad. The area of interest is highlighted, and the railroad network is marked (in black) in all images for reference.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Map of the study area highlighting the railroads and river basins. The map demarcates the river basins and the rail network. The legend indicates the different railroads and the watershed areas with their respective colors.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Multi-criteria analysis (MCA) for flood risk along the FCA (Ferrovia Centro Atlântica) railroad in Itaúna. The map displays various risk levels, from very low to high, along the railroad.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Results of machine learning models. Line charts comparing the actual precipitation values (black lines) with the predictions of regression models for a validation dataset. (<b>a</b>) Linear Regression (red), (<b>b</b>) Ridge Regression (green), (<b>c</b>) Lasso Regression (purple), (<b>d</b>) Random Forest (yellow), (<b>e</b>) Decision Tree (brown), (<b>f</b>) Support Vector Machine (pink). These graphs illustrate the ability of different models to predict precipitation values in relation to the actual data, allowing the visualization of discrepancies and potential overfitting in each approach.</p>
Full article ">
31 pages, 3113 KiB  
Article
Automatic Threshold Selection for Generalized Pareto and Pareto–Poisson Distributions in Rainfall Analysis: A Case Study Using the NOAA NCDC Daily Rainfall Database
by Roberto Mínguez
Atmosphere 2025, 16(1), 61; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos16010061 - 8 Jan 2025
Viewed by 365
Abstract
Both extreme-excess modeling and extreme-value analysis of precipitation events frequently utilize the Generalized Pareto (GP) distribution to model peaks above a selected threshold. However, selecting an appropriate threshold remains a complex and challenging task, which has discouraged many practitioners from employing Pareto or [...] Read more.
Both extreme-excess modeling and extreme-value analysis of precipitation events frequently utilize the Generalized Pareto (GP) distribution to model peaks above a selected threshold. However, selecting an appropriate threshold remains a complex and challenging task, which has discouraged many practitioners from employing Pareto or Pareto–Poisson distributions for extreme-value analysis. Recent analyses of threshold selection methods proposed in the technical literature, particularly when applied to rainfall records with high quantization levels, have shown that nonparametric methods are often unreliable. Additionally, methods relying on the asymptotic properties of the GP distribution tend to produce unrealistically high threshold estimates. In contrast, graphical methods and goodness-of-fit (GoF) metrics that account for the pre-asymptotic behavior of the GP distribution have demonstrated better performance. Despite these improvements, there remains no automatic and statistically robust methodology for threshold selection. This study develops an automatic, statistically sound procedure for optimal threshold selection, leveraging weighted mean square errors and internally studentized residuals. The proposed method outperforms existing approaches in terms of accuracy, as demonstrated through numerical experiments and its application to real-world data from the NOAA NCDC Daily Rainfall Database. Results indicate that the method not only improves threshold estimation precision but also enhances the reliability of extreme-value analysis for precipitation records, making it a valuable tool for hydrological applications. The findings emphasize the practical implications of the method for analyzing extreme rainfall events and its potential for broader climatological studies. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Precipitation Observations and Prediction (2nd Edition))
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Data associated with a 134-year record of daily rainfall observations and selected independent peaks from Australia (ASN00021043).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Mean Square Error (MSE) values and spline fit for the Langousis method. Local minima, indicating candidate thresholds, are marked with red triangles and vertical dashed lines.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Threshold Selection Comparison Across Methods and Significance Levels. The figure includes the percentage of NaN values (NaN) and the percentage of deviations within an absolute error of 1 (&lt;1) for each method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Computational Time Comparison Across Methods. The boxplot illustrates the computational times (in seconds) required for each method. The Langousis method shows significantly higher computational time compared to the other methods, while Studentized Residuals are the fastest.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>First iteration of the automatic method using <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>u</mi> <mi>i</mi> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>0.1</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> applied to the 134-year daily rainfall record from Australia (ASN00021043).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Second iteration of the automatic method using <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>u</mi> <mi>i</mi> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>2.0</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> applied to the 134-year daily rainfall record from Australia (ASN00021043).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Internally studentized residuals for threshold <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>u</mi> <mi>i</mi> </msub> <mo>=</mo> <mn>10.6</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math> in the 134-year daily rainfall record from Australia (ASN00021043).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Number of precipitation records as a function of the percentage of available data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>World map showing the 1909 selected precipitation stations with more than 110 years of daily rainfall records, marked as black filled triangles.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Boxplots associated with Threshold Selection Methods for stations in the GHCN-Daily dataset.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Comparison of CPU time required by different threshold selection methods for stations in the GHCN-Daily dataset.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Interpolated thresholds using the first local minima of Langousis’ method: L1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Maps and boxplots for the threshold differences with respect to L1 for L2, SR 1%, and SR 5%.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Maps and boxplots for the threshold differences with respect to L1 for AD 1% and AD 5%.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Maps and boxplots for the threshold differences with respect to L1 for CVM 1% and CVM 5%.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 6689 KiB  
Article
Assessing the Impact of Climate Change on Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) Curves for the Qassim Region, Saudi Arabia
by Mohammed ALRakathi and Abdullah Alodah
Atmosphere 2025, 16(1), 59; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos16010059 - 8 Jan 2025
Viewed by 391
Abstract
Climate change has the potential to significantly impact various aspects of Earth’s climate systems, including precipitation patterns, necessitating region-specific action plans. This study examines the Wadi Al Rummah region in Qassim province, Saudi Arabia, by analyzing Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) curves across six locations, utilizing [...] Read more.
Climate change has the potential to significantly impact various aspects of Earth’s climate systems, including precipitation patterns, necessitating region-specific action plans. This study examines the Wadi Al Rummah region in Qassim province, Saudi Arabia, by analyzing Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) curves across six locations, utilizing observed daily precipitation data from 1986 to 2014. The nonparametric quantile mapping method was employed to adjust the outputs of eight Regional Climate Models (RCMs) within the CMIP6 ensemble. These models were evaluated under four Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs), ranging from a stringent mitigation scenario to one with very high greenhouse gas emissions. Also, two statistical tests, namely the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Chi-Square tests, were used to assess the best-fitting distribution to estimate the maximum rainfall values. Temporal disaggregation of daily precipitation data was performed using the K-nearest neighbors (KNN) method. The IDF curves were generated for both historical and three projected future periods using Gumbel distribution, which proved to be the best-fitting statistical model, using six return periods: 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, and 100 years. Results indicate that high-emission scenarios and longer timeframes exhibit greater uncertainty in IDF projections. Additionally, rainfall intensity is expected to increase over shorter durations, with significant increases observed in Buriydah and Nabhaniyah under SSP 8.5. In contrast, Al Rass, Badayea, and Al Mithnab show mixed trends, while Unaizah shows little to no significant change. These findings emphasize the need for sustainable development and adaptive strategies to mitigate risks in Qassim province, as climate impacts are projected to intensify, particularly in the short to long term. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Hydrometeorological Extremes: Current Status and Emerging Challenges)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Location of the study area and the meteorological stations (colors indicate the elevation in meters above sea level).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>An illustrative flowchart delineating the methodologies for updating the IDF curves.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The K-nearest neighbor disaggregation process.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The IDF curves of Buridah station employing the Gumbel distribution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The IDF curves developed for all eight RCMs across four SSPs (boxplots) and the observed IDF curves (red lines) for (<b>a</b>) short-term, (<b>b</b>) mid-term, and (<b>c</b>) long-term future periods of Buraidah station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>The IDF curves developed for all eight RCMs across four SSPs (boxplots) and the observed IDF curves (red lines) for (<b>a</b>) short-term, (<b>b</b>) mid-term, and (<b>c</b>) long-term future periods of Buraidah station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Violin plots of the projected annual maximum precipitation intensity for all stations for comparison, covering different models and SSPs for three future periods. Tthe dotted lines represent the 25th percentile (Q1), the 50th percentile (median), and the 75th percentile (Q3) of the data distribution.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6 Cont.
<p>Violin plots of the projected annual maximum precipitation intensity for all stations for comparison, covering different models and SSPs for three future periods. Tthe dotted lines represent the 25th percentile (Q1), the 50th percentile (median), and the 75th percentile (Q3) of the data distribution.</p>
Full article ">
20 pages, 5597 KiB  
Article
Quantification of Soil Water Dynamics Response to Rainfall in Forested Hillslope Based on Soil Water Potential Measurement
by Ruxin Yang, Fei Wang, Xiangyu Tang, Junfang Cui, Genxu Wang, Li Guo and Han Zhang
Forests 2025, 16(1), 75; https://doi.org/10.3390/f16010075 - 5 Jan 2025
Viewed by 435
Abstract
Soil hydrological response is crucial for controlling water flow and biogeochemical processes on hillslopes. Understanding soil water dynamics in response to rainfall is essential for accurate hydrological modeling but remains challenging in humid mountainous regions characterized by high antecedent moisture and substantial heterogeneity. [...] Read more.
Soil hydrological response is crucial for controlling water flow and biogeochemical processes on hillslopes. Understanding soil water dynamics in response to rainfall is essential for accurate hydrological modeling but remains challenging in humid mountainous regions characterized by high antecedent moisture and substantial heterogeneity. We sought to elucidate soil water response patterns to rainfall by estimating lag time, wetting front velocity, rainfall threshold, and preferential flow (PF) frequency in 166 rainfall events across 36 sites on two hillslopes within the Hailuogou catchment, located on the eastern Qinghai–Tibet Plateau. Results indicated that over 90% of the events triggered rapid soil water potential (SWP) responses to depths of 100 cm, with faster responses observed at steeper upslope positions with thinner O horizons. Even light rainfall (2–3 mm) was sufficient to trigger SWP responses. PF was prevalent across the hillslopes, with higher occurrence frequencies at upslope and downslope positions due to steep terrain and consistently moist conditions, respectively. Using the Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines (MARS) model, we found that site factors (e.g., soil properties and topography) had a greater influence on SWP responses than rainfall characteristics or antecedent soil wetness conditions. These findings highlighted the value of SWP in capturing soil water dynamics and enhancing the understanding and modeling of complex hillslope hydrological processes. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The location of the study site on the eastern slope of Gongga Mountain, which is situated at the east end of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau (<b>a</b>); an overview of the Hailuogou Valley catchment (<b>b</b>); conceptualization diagram of the study hillslopes and monitoring point locations (<b>c</b>); the vegetations and soil profiles of HS1 and HS2 (<b>d</b>–<b>g</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Conceptual diagram of soil water potential response processes to rainfall. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> represents the initial time of the rainfall event; <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> denotes the time of soil water potential response at a specific depth (<span class="html-italic">n</span> = 1, 2, 3, corresponding to depths of 10 cm, 50 cm, and 100 cm, respectively); <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>∆</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> is the response lag time at a specific depth, calculated as <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> </mrow> </msub> <mo>−</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>; ASWP refers to the antecedent soil water potential, measured one hour prior to <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. <span class="html-italic">S</span> is the cumulative rainfall amount required to trigger a measurable SWP response at a specific soil depth.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Depth (<span class="html-italic">RD</span>), period (<span class="html-italic">RP</span>), peak intensities (<span class="html-italic">In<sub>peak</sub></span>), and average intensities (<span class="html-italic">In<sub>aver</sub></span>) of all rainfall events on HS1 (<b>a</b>) and HS2 (<b>b</b>) hillslopes, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Temporal variations in rainfall and corresponding average soil water potential (SWP) at 10 cm, 50 cm, and 100 cm of different positions on HS1 ((<b>a</b>)—rainfall, (<b>b</b>)—upslope, (<b>c</b>)—mid-slope, (<b>d</b>)—downslope) and HS2 ((<b>e</b>)—rainfall, (<b>f</b>)—upslope, (<b>g</b>)—mid-slope, (<b>h</b>)—downslope).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Response lag time (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>∆</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> across hillslopes, HS1 (<b>a1</b>,<b>a2</b>) and HS2 (<b>b1</b>,<b>b2</b>), with rainfall depth (blue bars) and peak intensity (grey filled circles) of each rainfall event (<b>a3</b>,<b>b3</b>). The box plot depicts the variation in <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>∆</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> across soil depths and hillslope positions (grey open circles are outliers). Symbol color represents the antecedent soil wetness condition (ASWP, hPa), and diameter represents the magnitude of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>∆</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi>T</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>. US, upslope; MS, mid-slope; DS, downslope. 10, 50, and 100 indicate the soil depths of 10 cm, 50 cm, and 100 cm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Wetting front velocity (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>v</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>) across hillslopes, HS1 (<b>a1</b>,<b>a2</b>) and HS2 (<b>b1</b>,<b>b2</b>), with rainfall depth (blue bars) and peak intensity (grey filled circles) of each rainfall event (<b>a3</b>,<b>b3</b>). The box plot depicts the variation in <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>v</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> across soil depths and hillslope positions (grey open circles are outliers). Symbol color represents the antecedent soil wetness condition (ASWP, hPa), and diameter represents the magnitude of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>v</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>. US, upslope; MS, mid-slope; DS, downslope. 10, 50, and 100 indicate the soil depths of 10 cm, 50 cm, and 100 cm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Rainfall thresholds (<span class="html-italic">S</span>) to trigger soil water potential response at different hillslope positions of HS1 (<b>a</b>) and HS2 (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The occurrence (<b>a1</b>,<b>b1</b>) and frequencies of preferential flow (<b>a2</b>,<b>b2</b>) across HS1 and HS2, with rainfall depth (blue bars) and peak intensity (grey filled circles) of each rainfall event (<b>a3</b>,<b>b3</b>). Black circles indicate non-preferential flow; green filled circles indicate the occurrence of preferential flow; black crosses indicate non-response.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Relative importance of the temporal (<b>a</b>) and site (<b>b</b>) factors for soil water potential response metrics (response lag time, wetting front velocity, and preferential flow frequency) from Multivariate Adaptive Regression Spline models. Wider links indicate greater importance. <span class="html-italic">Ks</span>, hydraulic conductivity; <span class="html-italic">Silt</span>%, silt content of soil; <span class="html-italic">Clay</span>%, clay content of soil.</p>
Full article ">
26 pages, 8067 KiB  
Article
The Performance of Irrigation Schemes in Sudan Affected by Climate Variability and the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam
by Shamseddin M. Ahmed, Khalid G. Biro Turk and Hassan Ali Dinar
Agronomy 2025, 15(1), 110; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15010110 - 3 Jan 2025
Viewed by 366
Abstract
Irrigation schemes represent the backbone of Sudan’s food security and economy. The Gezira, Rahad, and El-Gunied irrigation schemes depend mainly on the Blue Nile as their primary water source. However, the construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) in the Blue Nile [...] Read more.
Irrigation schemes represent the backbone of Sudan’s food security and economy. The Gezira, Rahad, and El-Gunied irrigation schemes depend mainly on the Blue Nile as their primary water source. However, the construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) in the Blue Nile at the Sudan border has changed water flow regulations along the Blue Nile. Therefore, the Sudanese irrigation schemes that depend on the Blue Nile are affected by the operation and management of the GERD. This study used datasets derived from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), specifically the enhanced vegetation index (EVI) and crop water use efficiency (CWUE), alongside climate time-series data obtained from the Climate Research Unit, to evaluate the performance of irrigation schemes in Sudan affected by climate variability and the construction and filling of the GERD. The analysis was carried out using R version 4.4.1 and spreadsheets. A dummy variable approach was employed to examine the effects of the GERD on the EVI, given the limited timeframe of the study, whilst Grey Relational Analysis was applied to investigate the influence of selected climate variables on the EVI. The results revealed that in the Gezira scheme, the impact of the GERD on the EVI was minimal, with rainfall and temperature identified as the predominant factors. In contrast, the construction of the GERD had significant negative repercussions on the EVI in the Rahad scheme, while it positively affected the El-Gunied scheme. The advantageous effects observed in the El-Gunied scheme were linked to the mitigation measures employed by the heightening of the Roseires Dam in Sudan since 2013. The Rahad and El-Gunied schemes exhibited heightened sensitivity to GERD-induced changes, primarily due to their reliance on irrigation water sourced from pumping stations dependent on Blue Nile water levels. Additionally, this study forecasts a decrease in cropping intensity attributed to the GERD, estimating reductions of 3.9% in Rahad, 1.5% in Gezira, and 0.8% in El-Gunied. Ultimately, this study highlights the detrimental impact of the GERD on Blue Nile water levels as a significant adverse factor associated with its construction and filling, which has led to a marked decline in CWUE across the irrigation schemes. The research underscores the intricate inter-relationship among environmental, political, institutional, and infrastructural elements that shapes irrigation efficiency and water management practices. This study concludes that enhancing irrigation efficiency and assessing the performance of irrigation schemes require significant consideration of institutional, economic, and political factors, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Water Use and Irrigation)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The studied irrigation schemes, Gezira, Rahad, and El-Gunied, in Sudan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The annual precipitation amounts recorded at both station and regional scales within the central region of Sudan. The CRU refers to rainfall estimates provided by the Climate Research Unit, which are verified by observed measurements taken at specific stations. While no substantial differences are observed at the regional scale (<b>a</b>), the differences become significant at the Wadmedani station (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The average surface air temperature recorded at three stations within the central region of Sudan, based on data from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) compared with observed datasets. At the regional level, the differences are minimal between the CRU and observed data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The enhanced vegetation index (EVI) of the three irrigation schemes in Sudan (2000–2024).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The linear relationship between the enhanced vegetation index (EVI) and the annual cultivated area of sorghum in the Gezira scheme, Sudan. The EVI could be effectively used for predicting the annual cultivated area in irrigation schemes in Sudan. The blue-dots line represents the trend.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The linear relationship between the enhanced vegetation index (EVI) and sugarcane yield in the El-Gunied irrigation scheme, Sudan. Accordingly, the EVI could be effectively used for predicting sugarcane yield in the central region of Sudan. The blue-dots line represents the trend.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Trends in the enhanced vegetation index (EVI) (2000–2023) (<b>a</b>) for Gezira, (<b>b</b>) for Rahad, and (<b>c</b>) for El-Gunied. The majority of the examined schemes have experienced declining trends in cultivated areas since the year 2000, as indicated by the EVI. Missing values, such as the 2018 season for El-Gunied, are considered outliers and are eliminated during the quality control procedure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7 Cont.
<p>Trends in the enhanced vegetation index (EVI) (2000–2023) (<b>a</b>) for Gezira, (<b>b</b>) for Rahad, and (<b>c</b>) for El-Gunied. The majority of the examined schemes have experienced declining trends in cultivated areas since the year 2000, as indicated by the EVI. Missing values, such as the 2018 season for El-Gunied, are considered outliers and are eliminated during the quality control procedure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Anomalies in the minimum and maximum surface air temperatures and the potential evapotranspiration (PET) in the central region of Sudan (<b>a</b>) based on the mean of the period of 2000–2020. The trends observed in temperature and PET display a comparable pattern. (<b>b</b>) Fluctuations in rainfall and the number of wet days in the central region of Sudan. Negative rainfall values indicate drought conditions (below normal conditions), whereas the negative values of temperature and PET indicate decreasing trends.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Fluctuations in the water level of the Blue Nile river and the discharge at the El-Gunied pumping station before and after the heightening of the Roseires Dam (2008–2014). There exists a discrepancy between the water level of the Blue Nile and the discharge from the pumps. Accordingly, in addition to the Blue Nile water level, various other factors do influence the irrigation water supply in the scheme. Data source: Osman [<a href="#B31-agronomy-15-00110" class="html-bibr">31</a>] and Ahmed [<a href="#B51-agronomy-15-00110" class="html-bibr">51</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The annual crop water use efficiency (CWUE) in the studied irrigation schemes in Sudan (2019–2022). The timeframe is quite restricted, as the collection of crop water use efficiency (CWUE) has only recently commenced by means of the Earth Data (the data source). The three schemes are experiencing declining trends in CWUE. Overall, the CWUE for sugarcane surpasses that of the irrigated crops found in the Rahad and Gezira schemes, which include cotton, sorghum, groundnut, and wheat.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 2360 KiB  
Article
Deep-Learning-Driven Insights into Nitrogen Leaching for Sustainable Land Use and Agricultural Practices
by Caixia Hu, Jie Li, Yaxu Pang, Lan Luo, Fang Liu, Wenhao Wu, Yan Xu, Houyu Li, Bingcang Tan and Guilong Zhang
Land 2025, 14(1), 69; https://doi.org/10.3390/land14010069 - 2 Jan 2025
Viewed by 364
Abstract
Nitrate leaching from soil presents a significant threat to soil health, as it can result in nutrient loss, soil acidification, and structural damage. It is crucial to quantify the spatial heterogeneity of nitrate leaching and its drivers. A total of 509 observational data [...] Read more.
Nitrate leaching from soil presents a significant threat to soil health, as it can result in nutrient loss, soil acidification, and structural damage. It is crucial to quantify the spatial heterogeneity of nitrate leaching and its drivers. A total of 509 observational data points regarding nitrate leaching in northern China were collected, capturing the spatial and temporal variations across crops such as winter wheat, maize, and greenhouse vegetables. A machine learning (ML) model for predicting nitrate leaching was then developed, with the random forest (RF) model outperforming the support vector machine (SVM), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and convolutional neural network (CNN) models, achieving an R2 of 0.75. However, the performance improved significantly after integrating the four models with Bayesian optimization (all models had R2 > 0.56), which realized quantitative prediction capabilities for nitrate leaching loss concentrations. Moreover, the XGBoost model exhibited the highest fitting accuracy and the smallest error in estimating nitrate leaching losses, with an R2 value of 0.79 and an average absolute error (MAE) of 3.87 kg/ha. Analyses of the feature importance and SHAP values in the optimal XGBoost model identified soil organic matter, chemical nitrogen fertilizer input, and water input (including rainfall and irrigation) as the main indicators of nitrate leaching loss. The ML-based modeling method developed overcomes the difficulty of the determination of the functional relationship between nitrate loss intensity and its influencing factors, providing a data-driven solution for estimating nitrate–nitrogen loss in farmlands in North China and strengthening sustainable agricultural practices. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Raw data and processed data QQ plots of average annual temperature (<b>A</b>), average annual rainfall (<b>B</b>), soil type (<b>C</b>), chemical N fertilizer input (<b>D</b>), organic N fertilizer input (<b>E</b>), irrigation amount (<b>F</b>), irrigation methods (<b>G</b>), soil total N (<b>H</b>), soil organic matter (<b>I</b>), soil pH (<b>J</b>), soil bulk density (<b>K</b>) and soil clay (<b>L</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Pearson’s correlation matrix of independent variables.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison of R<sup>2</sup>, <span class="html-italic">RMSE</span>, and <span class="html-italic">MAE</span> using the SVM (<b>A</b>), RF (<b>B</b>), XGBoost (<b>C</b>), and CNN (<b>D</b>) models for nitrate–nitrogen loss rate prediction on training and test datasets. Abbreviations: SVM, support vector machine; RF, random forest; XGBoost, extreme gradient boosting; CNN, convolutional neural network. Moving average error (<span class="html-italic">MAE</span>), root mean square error (<span class="html-italic">RMSE</span>), and coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Result of Bayesian-optimized hyperparameters in SVM (<b>A</b>), RF (<b>B</b>), XGBoost (<b>C</b>), and CNN (<b>D</b>) models for nitrate–nitrogen loss rate prediction. Abbreviations: SVM, support vector machine; RF, random forest; XGBoost, extreme gradient boosting; CNN, convolutional neural network. Moving average error (<span class="html-italic">MAE</span>), root mean square error (<span class="html-italic">RMSE</span>), and coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Ranking of the importance of input features (<b>A</b>) and the SHAP value for a particular variable (<b>B</b>).</p>
Full article ">
38 pages, 6599 KiB  
Article
Identifying Flood Source Areas and Analyzing High-Flow Extremes Under Changing Land Use, Land Cover, and Climate in the Gumara Watershed, Upper Blue Nile Basin, Ethiopia
by Haile Belay, Assefa M. Melesse, Getachew Tegegne and Habtamu Tamiru
Climate 2025, 13(1), 7; https://doi.org/10.3390/cli13010007 - 1 Jan 2025
Viewed by 728
Abstract
Changes in land use and land cover (LULC) and climate increasingly influence flood occurrences in the Gumara watershed, located in the Upper Blue Nile (UBN) basin of Ethiopia. This study assesses how these factors impact return period-based peak floods, flood source areas, and [...] Read more.
Changes in land use and land cover (LULC) and climate increasingly influence flood occurrences in the Gumara watershed, located in the Upper Blue Nile (UBN) basin of Ethiopia. This study assesses how these factors impact return period-based peak floods, flood source areas, and future high-flow extremes. Merged rainfall data (1981–2019) and ensemble means of four CMIP5 and four CMIP6 models were used for historical (1981–2005), near-future (2031–2055), and far-future (2056–2080) periods under representative concentration pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) and shared socioeconomic pathways (SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5). Historical LULC data for the years 1985, 2000, 2010, and 2019 and projected LULC data under business-as-usual (BAU) and governance (GOV) scenarios for the years 2035 and 2065 were used along with rainfall data to analyze flood peaks. Flood simulation was performed using a calibrated Hydrologic Engineering Center–Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS) model. The unit flood response (UFR) approach ranked eight subwatersheds (W1–W8) by their contribution to peak flood magnitude at the main outlet, while flow duration curves (FDCs) of annual maximum (AM) flow series were used to analyze changes in high-flow extremes. For the observation period, maximum peak flood values of 211.7, 278.5, 359.5, 416.7, and 452.7 m3/s were estimated for 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year return periods, respectively, under the 2019 LULC condition. During this period, subwatersheds W4 and W6 were identified as major flood contributors with high flood index values. These findings highlight the need to prioritize these subwatersheds for targeted interventions to mitigate downstream flooding. In the future period, the highest flow is expected under the SSP5-8.5 (2056–2080) climate scenario combined with the BAU-2065 land use scenario. These findings underscore the importance of strategic land management and climate adaptation measures to reduce future flood risks. The methodology developed in this study, particularly the application of RF-MERGE data in flood studies, offers valuable insights into the existing knowledge base on flood modeling. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location map of the study area. (<b>a</b>) Location map of the Upper Blue Nile (UBN) basin within the 12 river basins of Ethiopia. (<b>b</b>) Location map of the upstream Gumara watershed (bounded by a red rectangle) within the Lake Tana subbasin, and (<b>c</b>) Detailed map showing the rainfall and streamflow gauging stations, stream network, climate model grid (25 km × 25 km), and grid center for the NASA dataset, and elevation map of the upstream (flood source area) part of the Gumara watershed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>(<b>a</b>) Elevation, (<b>b</b>) slope, (<b>c</b>) hydrologic soil groups (HSGs), and (<b>d</b>–<b>k</b>) historical and projected land use and land cover maps of the Gumara watershed for the historical (1985, 2000, 2010, and 2019) and future years (2035 and 2065) under the business-as-usual (BAU) and governance (GOV) scenarios.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Methodological framework of the study. In the figure, boxes highlighted with grey color represent the main processing algorithm, tool, and hydrological model used in the study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Observed ground-based rainfall and discharge data from 1981 to 2019 for the Gumara watershed. (<b>a</b>) Double mass curve analysis, (<b>b</b>) mean annual rainfall of each ground-based rainfall station, (<b>c</b>) mean monthly rainfall, and (<b>d</b>) mean monthly discharge.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison of cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) of daily observed rainfall data from RF-MERGE and historical CMIP5 and CMIP6 models for the period 1981–2005.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>A 30 m spatial resolution gridded runoff curve numbers for the historical years (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) and future scenarios (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>). The gray shaded areas that bound in the figure illustrate the gradient orientation of the runoff curve number, with maximum values along the north and south directions and minimum values in the middle of the watershed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Historical (1981–2005) and projected (2031–2080) mean monthly rainfall (mm/month) of the Gumara watershed, estimated from RF-MERGE data and multi-model ensemble means from CMIP5 and CMIP6.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Spatial distribution of mean annual rainfall (MARF) in the historical (1981–2005) and two future periods, near-future (2031–2056) and far-future (2056–2080), under different climate scenarios. In the figures, different color gradients show the distribution of rainfall in the study area, where the dark blue color grade shows areas that receive the highest mean annual rainfall.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) Temporal variation of the long-term annual maximum (AM) 1-day rainfall series from RF-MERGE estimates (1981–2019) and (<b>b</b>) depth–duration–frequency (DDF) curve developed from RF-MERGE rainfall. In panel (<b>a</b>), the red line illustrates the increasing linear trend of annual maximum 1-day rainfall.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Box plot of historical (1981–2005) and projected (2031–2080) annual maximum (AM) 1-day rainfall, represented in different color. The plot summarizes the minimum, first quartile (Q1), median, third quartile (Q3), and maximum values of the rainfall data. The blue dashed lines indicate the full range of data (minimum and maximum values) across the study periods.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Percentage coverage of land use and land cover (LULC) classes of the Gumara watershed. (<b>a</b>) Historical years (1985, 2000, 2010, and 2019) and (<b>b</b>) future years (2035 and 2065) under the business-as-usual (BAU) and governance (GOV) scenarios.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Delineated subwatershed’s area, centroids, and stream network of the Gumara watershed as delineated in the HEC-HMS model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Model sensitivity analysis for the runoff curve number (CN) from 13 August to 31 August 2010.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Observed and simulated discharge for selected events: (<b>a</b>) Event 1 (calibration), from 1 July to 31 August 1996; (<b>b</b>) Event 2 (calibration), from 5 July to 31 July 2008; (<b>c</b>) Event 3 (validation), from 2 August to 27 August 2014.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>(<b>a</b>) Comparison of simulated peak discharge (Q) under various land use conditions across different return periods and (<b>b</b>) comparison of simulated runoff volume (V) under various land use conditions across different return periods.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Computed flood index (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>f</mi> <mi>i</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>) values estimated using the Unit Flood Response (UFR) approach for a 50-year return period peak discharge under different LULC conditions: (<b>a</b>) LULC-1985, (<b>b</b>) LULC-2000, (<b>c</b>) LULC-2010, and (<b>d</b>) LULC-2019. The blue color gradient represents flood index levels across subwatersheds, with the darkest blue indicating subwatersheds with the highest runoff potential.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Comparison between historical and future annual maximum 1-day flow duration curves. (<b>a</b>) Future climate combined with the BAU land use scenario and (<b>b</b>) future climate combined with the GOV land use scenario.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop