4.7 Article

Shifted discharge and drier soils: Hydrological projections for a Central Asian catchment

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrh.2023.101338

关键词

Hydrological modeling; SWAT; Climate impact assessment; Soil moisture evapotranspiration coupling; Central Asia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The impacts of climate change in the Naryn River Basin, Kyrgyzstan were investigated using two families of General Circulation Models (GCMs) and the hydrological model SWAT. The study found that the basin will experience an earlier peak flow, significant reductions in soil moisture, and increases in evapotranspiration. The analysis also revealed a positive feedback between soil moisture and evapotranspiration.
Study RegionThe Naryn River Basin, KyrgyzstanStudy FocusWe investigate the impacts of climate change in the basin based on two families of General Circulation Models (GCMs) using the hydrological model SWAT. The forcing datasets are the widely used ISIMIP2 (I2) and the newly derived ISIMIP3 (I3) data which refer to the 5th and 6th stage of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP). Due to notable differences in the forcing we evaluate their impacts on various hydrological components of the basin, such as discharge, evapotranspiration (ETA) and soil moisture (SM). Besides, a partial correlation (PC) analysis is used to assess the meteorological controls of the basin with special emphasize on the SM-ETA coupling. New Hydrological Insights for the RegionAgreement in the basin's projections is found, such as discharge shifts towards an earlier peak flow of one month, significant SM reductions and ETA increases. I3 temperature projections exceed their previous estimates and show an increase in precipitation, which differs from I2. However, the mitigating effects do not lead to an improvement in the region's susceptibility to soil moisture deficits. The PC study reveals enhanced water-limited conditions expressed as positive SM-ETA feedback under I2 and I3, albeit slightly weaker under I3.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据