What Can We Learn from a Reduced-Dimensional Groundwater Representation for Diagnosing Groundwater–Land Interactions? Insights from the Water Table Ratio
Abstract. Groundwater exerts an important control on land–atmosphere interactions, yet its explicit representation in Earth system models remains computationally prohibitive. Reduced-dimensional metrics, such as the Water Table Ratio (WTR), have been proposed to represent groundwater influences on land–atmosphere interactions. However, their uncertainty, classification stability, and correspondence with process-based representations remain largely unexplored. Here, because groundwater influences on the atmosphere are mediated through land surface processes, we compare WTR-based diagnoses of groundwater–land interactions with those derived from ParFlow–CLM simulations over a 34,000 km² catchment. Groundwater-sensitive regions are first identified by comparing paired ParFlow–CLM simulations with and without groundwater feedback and then used as a physically explicit reference for comparison with WTR. A total of 63 WTR configurations were examined, with Monte Carlo analyses performed for each to quantify uncertainty and classification stability.
Hydraulic conductivity (K) is the dominant source of uncertainty in WTR and exerts the strongest destabilizing effect on its threshold-based classification. Although the domain-wide proportions of correctly classified sensitive and insensitive areas remain nearly unchanged across alternative configurations and Monte Carlo realizations, substantial switching occurs among individual grid cells. Across the 63 WTR configurations, the mean correctly classified fraction was 0.40. In comparison, the critical-water-table-depth (WTD) approach yielded fractions of 0.59, 0.70, and 0.64 using WTD estimates from ParFlow–CLM, PCR-GLOBWB, and Fan et al., respectively. WTR errors are dominated by overestimation rather than underestimation, indicating a conservative screening tendency. Combining observed parameter contrasts with analytical WTR elasticities further identifies K as the dominant contributor to classification discrepancies, with characteristic length (L) providing a secondary contribution. The dominant role of K reveals a key consequence of reducing a heterogeneous three-dimensional groundwater system to a one-dimensional metric governed by a few effective parameters: the resulting classification becomes disproportionately dependent on a single effective hydraulic conductivity field. WTR can therefore support precautionary regional screening, but its local classifications should be interpreted cautiously, particularly where K is poorly constrained or subsurface heterogeneity is strong.
General comments
Good modelling hydrological research. Please, follow my suggestion to improve the final version of your manuscript.
Specific comments
Lines 32-34. Insert recent review papers that discuss challenges to resolve 3D groundwater flow at the regional and continental scales due to geological heterogeneities, and hydrological uncertainties:
- Condon, L. E., Kollet, S., Bierkens, M. F., Fogg, G. E., Maxwell, R. M., Hill, M. C., ... & Abesser, C. 2021. Global groundwater modeling and monitoring: Opportunities and challenges. Water Resources Research, 57(12), e2020WR029500.
- Lupi, F., Agbotui, P. Y., Medici, G. 2026. Hydraulic Conductivity in the Mesozoic units of the Umbria-Marche succession (Italy); insights towards a sustainable management of carbonate aquifers worldwide. Sustainability, 18, 9297; https://doi.org/10.3390/su18189297.
Line 128. Clarify the general goal of your research at the end of the discussion.
Line 128. Describe the 3 to 4 specific objectives of your research by using numbers (e.g., i, ii, and iii).
Lines 132-186. Please, provide basic information on climate of the study area.
Lines 132-185. Insert basic information on the geology/hydro-stratigraphy of the study area.
Lines 189-onwards. Provide more information on the physical principles underneath ParFlow.
Line 147 “Deeper aquifer”. How deep? Please, be more quantitative.
Line 271. There are several equations. They should have a number associated.
Line 271. There are several equations. Can you reduce the numbers of equations? That’s to be more conceptual towards the audience.
Line 302. Do you need to provide details for water viscosity and density values used for the conversion?
Line 643. Do you need a separate discussion where you engage the international community?
Lines 694-701. I suggest highlighting the novelty of your research.
Figures and tables
Lines 539-544. This caption is too long. Part of the text should be moved to the result section.