YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Journal of Hydrometeorology
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Journal of Hydrometeorology
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Surface Water and Energy Budgets for the Mississippi River Basin in Three NCEP Reanalyses

    Source: Journal of Hydrometeorology:;2014:;Volume( 016 ):;issue: 002::page 857
    Author:
    Yang, Rongqian
    ,
    Ek, Michael
    ,
    Meng, Jesse
    DOI: 10.1175/JHM-D-14-0056.1
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: urface water and energy budgets from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction?U.S. Department of Energy (NCEP?DOE) Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP-II) Global Reanalysis 2 (GR2), the North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR), and the NCEP Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR) are compared here with each other and with available observations over the Mississippi River basin. The comparisons in seasonal cycle, interannual variation, and annual mean over a 31-yr period show that there are a number of noticeable differences and similarities in the large-scale basin averages. Warm season precipitation and runoff in the GR2 are too large compared to the observations, and seasonal surface water variation is small. By contrast, the precipitation in both NARR and CFSR is more reasonable and in better agreement with the observation, although the corresponding seasonal runoff is very small. The main causes of the differences in both surface parameterization and approach used in assimilating the observed precipitation datasets and snow analyses are then discussed. Despite the discrepancies in seasonal water budget components, seasonal energy budget terms in the three reanalyses are close to each other and to available observations. The interannual variations in both water and energy budgets are comparable. This study shows that the CFSR achieves a large improvement over the GR2, indicating that the CFSR dataset can be used in climate variability studies. Nonetheless, improved land surface parameterization schemes and data assimilation techniques are needed to depict the surface water and energy climates better, in particular, the variation in seasonal runoff.
    • Download: (1.465Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Surface Water and Energy Budgets for the Mississippi River Basin in Three NCEP Reanalyses

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4225159
    Collections
    • Journal of Hydrometeorology

    Show full item record

    contributor authorYang, Rongqian
    contributor authorEk, Michael
    contributor authorMeng, Jesse
    date accessioned2017-06-09T17:15:56Z
    date available2017-06-09T17:15:56Z
    date copyright2015/04/01
    date issued2014
    identifier issn1525-755X
    identifier otherams-82084.pdf
    identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4225159
    description abstracturface water and energy budgets from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction?U.S. Department of Energy (NCEP?DOE) Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP-II) Global Reanalysis 2 (GR2), the North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR), and the NCEP Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR) are compared here with each other and with available observations over the Mississippi River basin. The comparisons in seasonal cycle, interannual variation, and annual mean over a 31-yr period show that there are a number of noticeable differences and similarities in the large-scale basin averages. Warm season precipitation and runoff in the GR2 are too large compared to the observations, and seasonal surface water variation is small. By contrast, the precipitation in both NARR and CFSR is more reasonable and in better agreement with the observation, although the corresponding seasonal runoff is very small. The main causes of the differences in both surface parameterization and approach used in assimilating the observed precipitation datasets and snow analyses are then discussed. Despite the discrepancies in seasonal water budget components, seasonal energy budget terms in the three reanalyses are close to each other and to available observations. The interannual variations in both water and energy budgets are comparable. This study shows that the CFSR achieves a large improvement over the GR2, indicating that the CFSR dataset can be used in climate variability studies. Nonetheless, improved land surface parameterization schemes and data assimilation techniques are needed to depict the surface water and energy climates better, in particular, the variation in seasonal runoff.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleSurface Water and Energy Budgets for the Mississippi River Basin in Three NCEP Reanalyses
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume16
    journal issue2
    journal titleJournal of Hydrometeorology
    identifier doi10.1175/JHM-D-14-0056.1
    journal fristpage857
    journal lastpage873
    treeJournal of Hydrometeorology:;2014:;Volume( 016 ):;issue: 002
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian