% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Huang:887682,
author = {Huang, Shaochun and Shah, Harsh and Naz, Bibi S. and
Shrestha, Narayan and Mishra, Vimal and Daggupati, Prasad
and Ghimire, Uttam and Vetter, Tobias},
title = {{I}mpacts of hydrological model calibration on projected
hydrological changes under climate change—a multi-model
assessment in three large river basins},
journal = {Climatic change},
volume = {163},
issn = {1573-1480},
address = {Dordrecht [u.a.]},
publisher = {Springer Science + Business Media B.V},
reportid = {FZJ-2020-04343},
pages = {1143–1164},
year = {2020},
abstract = {This study aimed to investigate the influence of
hydrological model calibration/validation on discharge
projections for three large river basins (the Rhine, Upper
Mississippi and Upper Yellow). Three hydrological models
(HMs), which have been firstly calibrated against the
monthly discharge at the outlet of each basin (simple
calibration), were re-calibrated against the daily discharge
at the outlet and intermediate gauges under contrast climate
conditions simultaneously (enhanced calibration). In
addition, the models were validated in terms of hydrological
indicators of interest (median, low and high flows) as well
as actual evapotranspiration in the historical period. The
models calibrated using both calibration methods were then
driven by the same bias corrected climate projections from
five global circulation models (GCMs) under four
Representative Concentration Pathway scenarios (RCPs). The
hydrological changes of the indicators were represented by
the ensemble median, ensemble mean and ensemble weighted
means of all combinations of HMs and GCMs under each RCP.
The results showed moderate $(5–10\%)$ to strong influence
$(> 10\%)$ of the calibration methods on the ensemble
medians/means for the Mississippi, minor to moderate (up to
$10\%)$ influence for the Yellow and minor $(< 5\%)$
influence for the Rhine. In addition, the enhanced
calibration/validation method reduced the shares of
uncertainty related to HMs for three indicators in all
basins when the strict weighting method was used. It also
showed that the successful enhanced calibration had the
potential to reduce the uncertainty of hydrological
projections, especially when the HM uncertainty was
significant after the simple calibration.},
cin = {IBG-3},
ddc = {550},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118},
pnm = {255 - Terrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction
(POF3-255)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000572592300001},
doi = {10.1007/s10584-020-02872-6},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/887682},
}