| Literature DB >> 30446760 |
Lin Tian1, Hongyan Li2, Fengping Li1, Xiubin Li3, Xinqiang Du1, Xueyan Ye1.
Abstract
Because of the unique climate characteristics, the runoff law in mid-temperate zone is very different from other regions in spring. Accurate runoff simulation and forecasting is of great importance to spring flood control and efficient use of water resources. Baishan reservoir is located in the upper Second Songhua River Basin in Northeast China, where snowmelt is an important source of runoff that contributes to the water supply. This study utilized long-term hydrometeorological data, in the contributing area of Bashan reservoir, to investigate factors and time-lag effects on spring snowmelt and to establish a snowmelt-runoff model. Daily precipitation, temperature, and wind data were collected from three meteorological stations in this region from 1987-2016. Daily runoff into the Baishan reservoir was selected for the same period. The snowmelt period was identified from March 23 to May 4 through baseflow segmentation with the Eckhardt recursive digital filtering method combined with statistical analyses. A global sensitivity analysis, based on the back propagation neural network method, was used to identify daily radiation, wind speed, mean temperature, and precipitation as the main factors affecting snowmelt runoff. Daily radiation, precipitation, and mean temperature factors had a two-day lag effect. Based on these factors, an empirical snowmelt runoff model was established by genetic algorithm (GAS) to estimate the snowmelt runoff in this area. The model showed an acceptable performance with coefficient of determination (R2) of 73.6%, relative error (Re) of 25.10%, and Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient (NSE) of 66.2% in the calibration period of 1987-2010, while reasonable performance with R2 of 62.3%, Re of 27.2%, and NSE of 46.0% was also achieved during the 2011-2016 validation period.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30446760 PMCID: PMC6240086 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-35282-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Location of the study area (above Baishan reservoir).
Figure 2Interannual variation of accumulated snow from 1987 to 2016.
Figure 3Variation of spring base flow ratio in 1971 (a), 1989 (b) and 2016 (c).
Figure 4Distributions of snowmelt start dates (a) and end dates (b) from 1971–2016.
Sample information when identifying the time-lag effect of radiation on runoff.
| No. | Net input/factors | Net output |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Solar radiation on the | Runoff (on the |
| 2 | Solar radiation on the | |
| 3 | Solar radiation on the | |
| 4 | Solar radiation on the | |
| 5 | Solar radiation on the | |
| 6 | Solar radiation on the |
Sample information for identifying impact factors (The value of * is obtained from the results of the previous six samples).
| No. | Net input/factors(considering time lag effects) | Net output |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Solar radiation * days ago (SRT*) | Runoff (on the day) |
| 2 | Wind speed * days ago (WinT*) | |
| 3 | Precipitation * days ago (PreT*) | |
| 4 | Minimum temperature * days ago (LTT*) | |
| 5 | Mean temperature * days ago (MTT*) | |
| 6 | Maximum temperature * days ago (HTT*) |
Main parameters for BP algorithm training and GAS.
| GAS parameters | BP parameters | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameter | Value | Parameter | Value | Parameter | Value | Parameter | Value |
| Population quantity | 12 000 | Aberration rate | 0.05 | Maximum of normalization | 0.90 | Regulating coefficient of learning rate | 0.80 |
| Selectance | 0.05 | Initial area | [−1, 1] | Minimum of normalization | 0.10 | Initial learning rate | 0.01 |
| Crossing-over rate | 0.10 | Evolution algebra | 30 | Momentum coefficient | 0.80 | Average error of network output | 0.02 |
Figure 5Lag time of each meteorological factor (T0 represent on the day relative to the runoff day; T1 represent yesterday relative to the runoff day, and so on).
Lag time of each meteorological factor on snowmelt runoff.
| Parameter | Lag period (day) | Parameter | Lag period (day) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Daily total amount of radiation exposure convergence | 0 | Daily minimum temperature | 1 |
| Daily mean wind speed | 0 | Daily mean temperature | 2 |
| Daily precipitation | 0 | Daily maximum temperature | 2 |
Figure 6Sensitivity of snowmelt runoff to each meteorological factor considering time-lag effect (a) and regardless of time-lag effect (b).
Figure 7Comparison between observed data and simulated data in calibration stage.
Figure 8Comparison between observed data and simulated data in verification stage.