Improving low flow prediction from hydrologic models using alternative model calibration and post-processing techniques
Abstract. Accurate prediction of low flow series and statistics remains a major challenge in hydrologic modeling. This study evaluates the effectiveness of combining model calibration strategies and post-processing approaches to improve low flow simulation from hydrologic models. WRF-Hydro, a fully distributed deterministic watershed model, is calibrated, post-processed, and evaluated using alternative methods that only require observed and simulated streamflows. Model calibration is performed using alternative objective functions that target different flow magnitudes. This study applies two post-processing approaches, quantile mapping bias correction and stochastic ensemble generation using log-streamflow ratios, to three unregulated watersheds in New York State. The skill of the model simulations and post-processing techniques is evaluated by assessing prediction of low flow series and statistics. Calibration alone could not address conditional bias or reduce the variability of low streamflow estimators. While quantile mapping removes conditional bias, estimators of low flow series and design statistics still exhibited large variability. In contrast, ensemble-based methods led to considerable reductions in both bias and variability of low flow series and design statistic estimators. The ensemble methods performed better when statistics were obtained from an average single streamflow trace than as the average of the statistic across all ensembles. In addition, during a forecasting simulation, resampling of errors from the calibration period was shown to improve low flow estimators during forecast periods when observed streamflows are unknown. These findings suggest that improving low flow simulations requires shifting emphasis from calibration and bias correction methods, toward the development of ensemble-based post-processing approaches.
Overview
This manuscript evaluates the use of several types of post-processing/bias correction tools for streamflow simulation and forecasting. The post-processing tools generally fall into two categories: quantile matching and ensemble generation. The authors also evaluate calibration approaches, using several variations of the Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE, LNSE, SNSE). For three sites in New York (USA), the authors compare combinations of these calibration and post-processing tools to evaluate how well they capture low flows.
I found the manuscript to be generally well written, with a relatively clear objective and approach. The findings are clear, and while limited in their global transferability outside the region, the study shows the importance of testing post-processing/bias correction approaches for low flows and lays out a clear workflow to do so. My main concerns are related to the Methodology. There were a few setups where more detail is needed on the approach and several important acronyms were not fully explained in the Methods. I therefore recommend a major (though not substantial) revision.
Major Comments
- QM
- QM
- QMQ
- EG
- EM
- EMF
- ME
- MEF
Minor Comments
Unfortunately, these statistics will no longer be available from 2025 because the US federal government is no longer interested in tracking climate or weather related disasters.
Mehrotra, R. and Sharma, A.: A Multivariate Quantile-Matching Bias Correction Approach with Auto- and Cross-Dependence across Multiple Time Scales: Implications for Downscaling, Journal of Climate, 29, 3519–3539, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0356.1, 2016.
Rajczak, J., Kotlarski, S., and Schär, C.: Does Quantile Mapping of Simulated Precipitation Correct for Biases in Transition Probabilities and Spell Lengths?, Journal of Climate, 29, 1605–1615, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0162.1, 2016.
Cannon, A. J., Sobie, S. R., and Murdock, T. Q.: Bias Correction of GCM Precipitation by Quantile Mapping: How Well Do Methods Preserve Changes in Quantiles and Extremes?, Journal of Climate, 28, 6938–6959, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00754.1, 2015.
Nguyen, N. Y., Anh, T. N., Nguyen, H. D., and Dang, D. K.: Quantile mapping technique for enhancing satellite-derived precipitation data in hydrological modelling: a case study of the Lam River Basin, Vietnam, Journal of Hydroinformatics, 26, 2026–2044, https://doi.org/10.2166/hydro.2024.225, 2024.
Gudmundsson, L., Bremnes, J. B., Haugen, J. E., and Engen-Skaugen, T.: Technical Note: Downscaling RCM precipitation to the station scale using statistical transformations - a comparison of methods, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 16, 3383–3390, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-3383-2012, 2012.
Quantile Mapping has also been used for streamflows:
Sanchez Lozano, J.L., Rojas Lesmes, D.J., Romero Bustamante, E.G., Hales, R.C., Nelson, E.J., Williams, G.P., Ames, D.P., Jones, N.L., Gutierrez, A.L., Cardona Almeida, C., 2025. Historical simulation performance evaluation and monthly flow duration curve quantile-mapping (MFDC-QM) of the GEOGLOWS ECMWF streamflow hydrologic model. Environmental Modelling & Software 183, 106235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2024.106235