HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (6) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lin, Z. Articles by Radcliffe, D. E. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Lin, Z. Articles by Radcliffe, D. E. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Lin, Z. Articles by Radcliffe, D. E. Related Collections Watershed and Landscape Processes Uncertainty Analysis Inverse Procedures/Parameter Estimation

SPECIAL SECTION: FROM FIELD- TO LANDSCAPE-SCALE VADOSE ZONE PROCESSES

Automatic Calibration and Predictive Uncertainty Analysis of a Semidistributed Watershed Model

Dep. of Crop and Soil Sciences, Univ. of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602
^* Corresponding author (linzhulu{at}uga.edu)

Received 14 February 2005.

Semidistributed models are commonly calibrated manually, but software for automatic calibration is now available. We present a two-stage routine for automatic calibration of the semidistributed watershed model Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) that finds the best values for the model parameters, preserves spatial variability in essential parameters, and leads to a measure of the model prediction uncertainty. In the first stage, a modified global Shuffled Complex Evolution (SCE-UA) method was employed to find the "best" values for the lumped model parameters. In the second stage, the spatial variability of the original model parameters was restored and a local search method (a variant of Levenberg–Marquart method) was used to find a more distributed set of parameters using the results of the previous stage as starting values. A method called "regularization" was adopted to prevent the parameters from taking extreme values. In addition, we applied a nonlinear calibration-constrained method to develop confidence intervals for annual and 7-d average flow predictions. We calibrated stream flow in the Etowah River measured at Canton, GA (a watershed area of 1580 km²) for the years 1983 to 1992 and used the years 1993 to 2001 for validation. The Parameter Estimator (PEST) software was used to conduct the two-stage automatic calibration and prediction uncertainty analysis. Calibration for daily and monthly flow produced a very good fit to the measured data. Nash-Sutcliffe coefficients for daily and monthly flow over the calibration period were 0.60 and 0.86, respectively. They were 0.61 and 0.87, respectively, for the validation period. The nonlinear prediction uncertainty analysis worked well for long-term (annual) flow in that our prediction confidence intervals included or were very near to the observed flow for most years. It did not work well for short-term (7-d average) flows in that the prediction confidence intervals did not include the observed flow, especially for low and high flow conditions.

Abbreviations: AWC, available water capacity • BMP, best management practice • ET, evapotranspiration • HRU, hydrologic response units • MCMC, Markov Chain Monte Carlo • PEST, Parameter Estimator • SAC-SMA, Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting • SCE-UA, Shuffled Complex Evolution • SCEM, Shuffled Complex Evolution Metropolis • STATSGO, State Soil Geographic database • SWAT, Soil and Water Assessment Tool

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. Wohling, J. A. Vrugt, and G. F. Barkle Comparison of Three Multiobjective Optimization Algorithms for Inverse Modeling of Vadose Zone Hydraulic Properties Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., January 25, 2008; 72(2): 305 - 319. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. L. Corwin, J. Hopmans, and G. H. de Rooij From Field- to Landscape-Scale Vadose Zone Processes: Scale Issues, Modeling, and Monitoring Vadose Zone J., March 8, 2006; 5(1): 129 - 139. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]