Evaluating the Effects of Precipitation and Evapotranspiration on Soil Moisture Variability Within CMIP5 Using SMAP and ERA5 Data

被引:2
|
作者
Xi, Xuan [1 ]
Zhuang, Qianlai [1 ,2 ]
Kim, Seungbum [3 ]
Gentine, Pierre [4 ]
机构
[1] Purdue Univ, Dept Earth Atmospher & Planetary Sci, W Lafayette, IN USA
[2] Purdue Univ, Dept Agron, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
[3] NASA Jet Prop Lab, Pasadena, CA USA
[4] Columbia Univ, Dept Earth Environm Engn, New York, NY USA
关键词
soil moisture; precipitation; evapotranspiration; earth system models; Fourier transform; LAND-ATMOSPHERE INTERACTIONS; TERRESTRIAL; VALIDATION; MEMORY; WATER;
D O I
10.1029/2022WR034225
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The effects of precipitation (Pr) and evapotranspiration (ET) on surface soil moisture (SSM) play an essential role in the land-atmosphere system. Here we evaluate multimodel differences of these effects within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) compared to Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) products and ECMWF Reanalysis v5 (ERA5) as references in a frequency domain. The variability of SSM, Pr, and ET within three frequency bands (1/7 similar to 1/30 days(-1), 1/30 similar to 1/90 days(-1), and 1/90 similar to 1/365 days(-1)) after normalization is quantified using Fourier transform. We analyze the impact of ET and Pr on SSM variability based on a transfer function assuming that these variables form a linear time-invariant (LTI) system. For the total effects of ET and Pr on SSM variability, the CMIP5 estimations are smaller than the reference data in the two higher frequency bands and are larger than the reference data in the lowest frequency band. Besides, the effects on SSM by Pr and ET are found to be different across the three frequency bands. In each frequency band, the variability of the factor that dominates SSM (i.e., Pr or ET) from CMIP5 is smaller than that from the references. This study identifies the spatiotemporal distribution of differences between CMIP5 models and references (SMAP and ERA5) in simulating ET and Pr effects on SSM within three frequency bands. This study provides insightful information on how soil moisture variability is affected by varying precipitation and evapotranspiration at different time scales within Earth System Models. Plain Language Summary Climate is influenced by the interactions between the land surface and atmosphere boundary, and soil moisture is a key component of these physical processes. Precipitation and evapotranspiration, as two major variables involved in these interactions, have been largely regarded as essential processes affecting soil moisture dynamics. However, Earth System Models have large uncertainties in simulating these effects. This study compares the average performance of 14 Earth System Models in capturing the effects of precipitation and evapotranspiration on surface soil moisture variability. We find that (a) soil moisture is mainly affected by precipitation at weekly to seasonal time scales and by evapotranspiration at seasonal to annual time scales; (b) compared to two largely used reference data, the total effects of precipitation and evapotranspiration on soil moisture is smaller at weekly to seasonal time scales and are larger at seasonal to annual time scale; and (c) spatially, models tend to simulate less variability of precipitation or evapotranspiration as a major control on surface soil moisture.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Evaluating the Variability of Surface Soil Moisture Simulated Within CMIP5 Using SMAP Data
    Xi, Xuan
    Gentine, Pierre
    Zhuang, Qianlai
    Kim, Seungbum
    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES, 2022, 127 (05)
  • [2] Evaluating the drought response of CMIP5 models using global gross primary productivity, leaf area, precipitation, and soil moisture data
    Huang, Yuanyuan
    Gerber, Stefan
    Huang, Tongyi
    Lichstein, Jeremy W.
    GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES, 2016, 30 (12) : 1827 - 1846
  • [3] Assessment of SMOS Root Zone Soil Moisture: A Comparative Study Using SMAP, ERA5, and GLDAS
    Ojha, Nitu
    Mahmoodi, Ali
    Mialon, Arnaud
    Richaume, Philippe
    Ferrant, Sylvain
    Kerr, Yann H.
    IEEE ACCESS, 2024, 12 : 76121 - 76132
  • [4] Soil Moisture-Evapotranspiration Coupling in CMIP5 Models: Relationship with Simulated Climate and Projections
    Berg, Alexis
    Sheffield, Justin
    JOURNAL OF CLIMATE, 2018, 31 (12) : 4865 - 4878
  • [5] Brief communication: Evaluating Antarctic precipitation in ERA5 and CMIP6 against CloudSat observations
    Roussel, Marie-Laure
    Lemonnier, Florentin
    Genthon, Christophe
    Krinner, Gerhard
    CRYOSPHERE, 2020, 14 (08): : 2715 - 2727
  • [6] CMIP5 drought projections in Canada based on the Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index
    Tam, Benita Y.
    Szeto, Kit
    Bonsal, Barrie
    Flato, Greg
    Cannon, Alex J.
    Rong, Robin
    CANADIAN WATER RESOURCES JOURNAL, 2019, 44 (01) : 90 - 107
  • [7] Evaluating the Evolution of ECMWF Precipitation Products Using Observational Data for Iran: From ERA40 to ERA5
    Ghajarnia, Navid
    Akbari, Mahdi
    Saemian, Peyman
    Ehsani, Mohammad Reza
    Hosseini-Moghari, Seyed-Mohammad
    Azizian, Asghar
    Kalantari, Zahra
    Behrangi, Ali
    Tourian, Mohammad J.
    Klove, Bjorn
    Haghighi, Ali Torabi
    EARTH AND SPACE SCIENCE, 2022, 9 (10)
  • [8] Comparisons of observational data sets for evaluating the CMIP5 precipitation extreme simulations over Asia
    Dong, Siyan
    Sun, Ying
    CLIMATE RESEARCH, 2018, 76 (02) : 161 - 176
  • [9] Evaluating ENSO teleconnections using observations and CMIP5 models
    Indrani Roy
    Alexandre S. Gagnon
    Devendraa Siingh
    Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 2019, 136 : 1085 - 1098
  • [10] Evaluating ENSO teleconnections using observations and CMIP5 models
    Roy, Indrani
    Gagnon, Alexandre S.
    Siingh, Devendraa
    THEORETICAL AND APPLIED CLIMATOLOGY, 2019, 136 (3-4) : 1085 - 1098