[go: up one dir, main page]

 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Search Results (335)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = IMERG

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
21 pages, 7364 KiB  
Article
Deriving Tropical Cyclone-Associated Flood Hazard Information Using Clustered GPM-IMERG Rainfall Signatures: Case Study in Dominica
by Catherine Nabukulu, Victor G. Jetten, Janneke Ettema, Bastian van den Bout and Reindert J. Haarsma
Atmosphere 2024, 15(9), 1042; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15091042 - 29 Aug 2024
Viewed by 864
Abstract
Various stakeholders seek effective methods to communicate the potential impacts of tropical cyclone (TC) rainfall and subsequent flood hazards. While current methods, such as Intensity–Duration–Frequency curves, offer insights, they do not fully capture TC rainfall complexity and variability. This research introduces an innovative [...] Read more.
Various stakeholders seek effective methods to communicate the potential impacts of tropical cyclone (TC) rainfall and subsequent flood hazards. While current methods, such as Intensity–Duration–Frequency curves, offer insights, they do not fully capture TC rainfall complexity and variability. This research introduces an innovative workflow utilizing GPM-IMERG satellite precipitation estimates to cluster TC rainfall spatial–temporal patterns, thereby illustrating their potential for flood hazard assessment by simulating associated flood responses. The methodology is tested using rainfall time series from a single TC as it traversed a 500 km diameter buffer zone around Dominica. Spatial partitional clustering with K-means identified the spatial clusters of rainfall time series with similar temporal patterns. The optimal value of K = 4 was most suitable for grouping the rainfall time series of the tested TC. Representative precipitation signals (RPSs) from the quantile analysis generalized the cluster temporal patterns. RPSs served as the rainfall input for the openLISEM, an event-based hydrological model simulating related flood characteristics. The tested TC exhibited three spatially distinct levels of rainfall magnitude, i.e., extreme, intermediate, and least intense, each resulting in different flood responses. Therefore, TC rainfall varies in space and time, affecting local flood hazards; flood assessments should incorporate variability to improve response and recovery. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Rainfall-Induced Hazard Research)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Flow chart for the proof of concept showing the sequence of analyses that form the developed workflow.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Illustration of the procedure for selecting cluster representative precipitation signals. (<b>a</b>) Visualization of a selection of pixel rainfall time series of a given cluster. (<b>b</b>) Rainfall series after applying a starting threshold. (<b>c</b>) Example for timestep quantile series for probabilities 0.5, 0.75, and 0.9 calculated after applying the starting threshold.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Map of the region of interest defined by the buffer boundary. The cumulative total rainfall for any given pixel in the study area over the selected time window is represented with a green-red colour ramp. The clusters labelled T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5 resulted from using <span class="html-italic">K</span> = 5 when conducting the spatial clustering analysis of the pixel rainfall time series. The bottom inset is the location of the Grand Bay catchment for which the flood modelling was performed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Elbow graph of the optimal <span class="html-italic">K</span> values used to experiment with the developed workflow. The total within-cluster sum of squares (TWSS) is the total sum of the squared distances between the data points and the centroid of their assigned clusters.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The outcome of the time alignment and quantile analysis when applying <span class="html-italic">K</span> = 5. Only Q<sub>0.5</sub> and Q<sub>0.75</sub> were selected for each cluster as the representative precipitation signals (RPSs). Clusters T1, T3, T4, and T5 are in graphs (<b>a</b>), (<b>b</b>), (<b>c</b>), and (<b>d</b>), respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Flood depth maps for Grand Bay catchment on Dominica as simulated using the Q<sub>0.75</sub> RPSs for clusters T1, T3, and T4 resulting from applying <span class="html-italic">K</span> = 4.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Precipitation time series (intensity/duration) and cumulative plots of the TC-associated rainfall scenarios for TS Erika resulting from <span class="html-italic">K</span> = 4. The blue bar graphs represent the half-hourly rainfall intensities, and the black line is for the cumulative precipitation. (<b>a</b>) Extreme, (<b>b</b>) intermediate, and (<b>c</b>) least intense.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Plots of (<b>a</b>) the average hourly rainfall on Dominica due to TS Erika and the line plot of the cumulative rain from <a href="#atmosphere-15-01042-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a> of the report by [<a href="#B28-atmosphere-15-01042" class="html-bibr">28</a>]. Plots (<b>b</b>,<b>c</b>) compare the output cluster-based design events with the design storms derived from IDF curves available for the region in <a href="#atmosphere-15-01042-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a> from [<a href="#B20-atmosphere-15-01042" class="html-bibr">20</a>] by applying the ABM. The line plots (<b>b</b>,<b>c</b>) are the corresponding cumulative rainfall, black for the output cluster-based design events and orange for the design storms.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>The maps below represent the cluster boundaries resulting from applying <span class="html-italic">K</span> = 4 (<b>left</b>) and <span class="html-italic">K</span> = 3 (<b>right</b>) when conducting the spatial partitional clustering.</p>
Full article ">
30 pages, 6101 KiB  
Article
Exploring the Added Value of Sub-Daily Bias Correction of High-Resolution Gridded Rainfall Datasets for Rainfall Erosivity Estimation
by Roland Yonaba, Lawani Adjadi Mounirou, Amadou Keïta, Tazen Fowé, Cheick Oumar Zouré, Axel Belemtougri, Moussa Bruno Kafando, Mahamadou Koïta, Harouna Karambiri and Hamma Yacouba
Hydrology 2024, 11(9), 132; https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology11090132 - 23 Aug 2024
Viewed by 965
Abstract
This study evaluates the impact of sub-daily bias correction of gridded rainfall products (RPs) on the estimation rainfall erosivity in Burkina Faso (West African Sahel). Selected RPs, offering half-hourly to hourly rainfall, are assessed against 10 synoptic stations over the period 2001–2020 to [...] Read more.
This study evaluates the impact of sub-daily bias correction of gridded rainfall products (RPs) on the estimation rainfall erosivity in Burkina Faso (West African Sahel). Selected RPs, offering half-hourly to hourly rainfall, are assessed against 10 synoptic stations over the period 2001–2020 to appraise their accuracy. The optimal product (the integrated multi-satellite retrievals for GPM, IMERG) is further used as a reference for bias correction, to adjust the rainfall distribution in the remaining RPs. RPs-derived rainfall erosivity is compared to the global rainfall erosivity database (GloREDa) estimates. The findings indicate that bias correction improves the rainfall accuracy estimation for all RPs, in terms of quantitative, categorial metrics and spatial patterns. It also improved the distributions of rainfall event intensities and duration across all products, which further significantly improved the annual rainfall erosivity estimates at various timescales along with spatial patterns across the country, as compared to raw RPs. The study also highlights that bias correction is effective at aligning annual trends in rainfall with those in rainfall erosivity derived from RPs. The study therefore underscores the added value of bias correction as a practice for improving the rainfall representation in high-resolution RPs before long-term rainfall erosivity assessment, particularly in data-scarce regions vulnerable to land degradation. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location of Burkina Faso in West Africa. (<b>a</b>) Relief map and location of the 10 synoptic stations providing daily rainfall gauge measurements. The elevation data is provided by a forests and buildings removed Copernicus digital elevation model (FABDEM), with a spatial resolution of 30 m [<a href="#B70-hydrology-11-00132" class="html-bibr">70</a>]; (<b>b</b>) Climatic zones derived from ordinary kriging of average annual rainfall over the period 2001–2020: hot desert climate (<span class="html-italic">BWh</span>), commonly referred to as Sahelian climate, with an annual rainfall below 600 mm in the north region; hot semi-arid climate (<span class="html-italic">BSh</span>) or Sudano–Sahelian climate, with an annual rainfall between 600 and 900 mm in the central region; tropical savanna climate (<span class="html-italic">Aw</span>), also known as Sudanian climate, with an annual rainfall over 900 mm in the south.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Taylor diagram comparing daily rainfall across the RPs to gauge observations over the period 2001–2020 across synoptic stations in Burkina Faso.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Diurnal hourly quantile delta mapping bias correction applied to rainfall products (RPs) using IMERG data as the reference. (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>): raw RPs rainfall data; (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>) bias-corrected RPs rainfall data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparison of rainfall products’ (RPs’) accuracy through categorical metrics for rainfall thresholds between 12.7 and 25 mm over the period 2001–2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison of the distribution of rainfall intensities and rainfall event durations in the rainfall products (RPs). (<b>a</b>) rainfall intensity in raw RPs; (<b>b</b>) rainfall duration in raw RPs; (<b>c</b>) rainfall intensity in bias-corrected RPs; (<b>d</b>) rainfall duration in bias-corrected RPs. The black vertical line in each distribution shows the location of the median value in a given distribution. The figure was drawn using the <span class="html-italic">ggridges</span> R package [<a href="#B100-hydrology-11-00132" class="html-bibr">100</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Comparison of spatial patterns in average annual rainfall across Burkina Faso over the period 2001–2020. The sampled values at the synoptic gauge stations were interpolated over the country using the inverse distance weighting (order 2) spatial interpolation method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Site-specific conversion factors between the maximum 30 min (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>I</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>30</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>) and maximum 60 min (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>I</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>60</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>) rainfall intensities. The blue dotted line shows the linear regression line, which is significant for all locations (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.93–0.94, <span class="html-italic">p</span>-value &lt; 0.0001).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparison of rainfall products (RP)-derived R-factors to GloREDa reference values. (<b>a</b>) Distribution of annual R-factors estimated from raw RPs. (<b>b</b>) Distribution of annual R-factors estimated from bias-corrected RPs, which are now closer to GloREDa estimates. The middle line in each boxplot shows the median value of the distribution. A square-foot transformation was applied to the vertical axis in both panels for easier comparison of the distributions.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Average monthly R-factors derived from bias-corrected RPs over the period 2001–2020. The coloured bars in the background indicate the monthly R-factors estimated from each RP. The superimposed grey bars show reference monthly R-factors derived from GloREDa. The cumulative annual R-factor for each RP is indicated in each panel in MJ mm ha<sup>−1</sup> h<sup>−1</sup> yr<sup>−1</sup>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Spatial patterns of average annual rainfall erosivity R-factors in Burkina Faso over the period 2001–2020. The local estimates at each synoptic station are spatially interpolated using inverse distance weighting (IDW). A square root transformation is applied to the legend’s colour scale to clearly highlight the spatial variability among the RPs.</p>
Full article ">
30 pages, 12891 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of GPM IMERG Early, Late, and Final Run in Representing Extreme Rainfall Indices in Southwestern Iran
by Mohammad Sadegh Keikhosravi-Kiany and Robert C. Balling
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(15), 2779; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16152779 - 30 Jul 2024
Viewed by 569
Abstract
The growing concerns about floods have highlighted the need for accurate and detailed precipitation data as extreme precipitation occurrences can lead to catastrophic floods, resulting in significant economic losses and casualties. Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM IMERG) is a [...] Read more.
The growing concerns about floods have highlighted the need for accurate and detailed precipitation data as extreme precipitation occurrences can lead to catastrophic floods, resulting in significant economic losses and casualties. Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM IMERG) is a commonly used high-resolution gridded precipitation dataset and is recognized as trustworthy alternative sources of precipitation data. The aim of this study is to comprehensively evaluate the performance of GPM IMERG Early (IMERG-E), Late (IMERG-L), and Final Run (IMERG-F) in precipitation estimation and their capability in detecting extreme rainfall indices over southwestern Iran during 2001–2020. The Asfezari gridded precipitation data, which are developed using a dense of ground-based observation, were utilized as the reference dataset. The findings indicate that IMERG-F performs reasonably well in capturing many extreme precipitation events (defined by various indices). All three products showed a better performance in capturing fixed and non-threshold precipitation indices across the study region. The findings also revealed that both IMERG-E and IMERG-L have problems in rainfall estimation over elevated areas showing values of overestimations. Examining the effect of land cover type on the accuracy of the precipitation products suggests that both IMERG-E and IMERG-L show large and highly unrealistic overestimations over inland water bodies and permanent wetlands. The results of the current study highlight the potential of IMERG-F as a valuable source of data for precipitation monitoring in the region. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Remote Sensing of Precipitation Extremes)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>General location of the study region in Northern Hemisphere (<b>a</b>) and topography of the region (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Spatial values of (POD), (FAR), and (CSI) in the study area for IMERG-E (<b>a</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>g</b>), IMERG-L (<b>b</b>,<b>e</b>,<b>h</b>), and IMERG-F (<b>c</b>,<b>f</b>,<b>i</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Monthly amount of precipitation in the study area averaged over 2001–2020 derived from Asfezari, IMERG-E, IMERG-L, and IMERG-F.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scatterplots of precipitation for IMERG-E, IMERG-L, and IMERG-F compared to Asfezari for winter (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>), spring (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>), summer (<b>g</b>–<b>i</b>), and fall (<b>j</b>–<b>l</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Seasonal values of precipitation for winter (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>), spring (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>), summer (<b>i</b>–<b>l</b>), and fall (<b>m</b>–<b>p</b>) derived from Asfezari, IMERG-E, IMERG-L, and IMERG-F.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Density-colored scatterplots of IMERG-E, IMERG-L, and IMERG-F against Asfezari, for winter (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>), spring (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>), summer (<b>g</b>–<b>i</b>), and fall (<b>j</b>–<b>l</b>) over the study region. The color represents the occurrence frequency.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Annual values of precipitation derived from (<b>a</b>) IMERG-E, (<b>b</b>) IMERG-L, and (<b>c</b>) IMERG-F, and Asfezari (<b>d</b>) averaged over 2001–2020 and annual density-colored scatterplots of IMERG-E (<b>e</b>), IMERG-L (<b>f</b>), and IMERG-F (<b>g</b>) against Asfezari over the study region. The color represents the occurrence frequency.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Land cover types of the study area derived from MCD12Q1.061 (<b>a</b>) along with focus on the permanent wet lands and inland water bodies (<b>b</b>) and Map of Google Earth image depicting earth surface features (<b>c</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>The bias (%) of IMERG-E (<b>a</b>), IMERGE-L (<b>b</b>), and IMERG-F (<b>c</b>) against Asfezari for each of the elevation levels.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Annual values of precipitation derived from (<b>a</b>) IMERG-E V07, (<b>b</b>) IMERG-L V07, and (<b>c</b>) IMERG-F V07, and Asfezari (<b>d</b>) averaged over 2001–2020 and annual density-colored scatterplots of IMERG-E V07 (<b>e</b>), IMERG-L V07 (<b>f</b>), and IMERG-F V07 (<b>g</b>) against Asfezari over the study region. The color represents the occurrence frequency.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The bias (%) of IMERG-E V07 (<b>a</b>), IMERGE-L V07 (<b>b</b>), and IMERG-F V07 (<b>c</b>) against Asfezari for each of the elevation levels.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Long-term means of fixed threshold extreme precipitation indices (R10, R20, CWD, CDD) for Asfezari (<b>a</b>,<b>e</b>,<b>i</b>,<b>m</b>), IMERG-E (<b>b</b>,<b>f</b>,<b>j</b>,<b>n</b>), IMERG-L(<b>c</b>,<b>g</b>,<b>k</b>,<b>o</b>), and IMERG-F (<b>d</b>,<b>h</b>,<b>l</b>,<b>p</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Density-colored scatterplots of extreme precipitation indices (R10, R20, CWD, CDD) for IMERG-E (<b>a</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>g</b>,<b>j</b>), IMERG-L (<b>b</b>,<b>e</b>,<b>h</b>,<b>k</b>), and IMERG-F (<b>c</b>,<b>f</b>,<b>i</b>,<b>l</b>) against the Asfezari dataset. The color represents the occurrence frequency.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Long-term means of grid-related extreme precipitation indices (R95p, R99p, R95pTOT, and R99pTOT) for Asfezari (<b>a</b>,<b>e</b>,<b>i</b>,<b>m</b>), IMERG-E (<b>b</b>,<b>f</b>,<b>j</b>,<b>n</b>), IMERG-L(<b>c</b>,<b>g</b>,<b>k</b>,<b>o</b>), and IMERG-F (<b>d</b>,<b>h</b>,<b>l</b>,<b>p</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Density-colored scatterplots of extreme precipitation indices (R95p, R99p, R95pTOT, and R99pTOT) for IMERG-E (<b>a</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>g</b>,<b>j</b>), IMERG-L (<b>b</b>,<b>e</b>,<b>h</b>,<b>k</b>), and IMERG-F (<b>c</b>,<b>f</b>,<b>i</b>,<b>l</b>) against the Asfezari dataset. The color represents the occurrence frequency.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Long-term means of non-threshold indices extreme precipitation indices (Rx1day (mm), SDII (mm), and PRCPTOT (mm)) for Asfezari (<b>a</b>,<b>e</b>,<b>i</b>), IMERG-E (<b>b</b>,<b>f</b>,<b>j</b>), IMERG-L(<b>c</b>,<b>g</b>,<b>k</b>), and IMERG-F (<b>d</b>,<b>h</b>,<b>l</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Density-colored scatterplots of extreme precipitation indices (Rx1day, SDII, PRCPTOT) for IMERG-E (<b>a</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>g</b>), IMERG-L (<b>b</b>,<b>e</b>,<b>h</b>), and IMERG-F (<b>c</b>,<b>f</b>,<b>i</b>) against the Asfezari dataset. The color represents the occurrence frequency.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Temporal variation in the fixed threshold indices generated from Asfezari, IMERG-E, IMERG-L, and IMERG-F over 2001–2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Temporal variation in the grid-related threshold indices generated from Asfezari, IMERG-E, IMERG-L, and IMERG-F over 2001–2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Temporal variation in the non-threshold indices generated from Asfezari, IMERG-E, IMERG-L, and IMERG-F over 2001–2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 21
<p>Relevant error box plots for Asfezari, IMERG-E, IMERG-L, and IMERG-F for fixed threshold indices (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>), grid-related threshold indices (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>), and non-threshold indices (<b>i</b>–<b>k</b>). The whiskers denote the maximum and minimum values in the data. The boxes extending from Q1 to Q3 show the median, while the red + symbols show outliers.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 6948 KiB  
Article
Has IMERG_V07 Improved the Precision of Precipitation Retrieval in Mainland China Compared to IMERG_V06?
by Hao Guo, Yunfei Tian, Junli Li, Chunrui Guo, Xiangchen Meng, Wei Wang and Philippe De Maeyer
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(14), 2671; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16142671 - 22 Jul 2024
Viewed by 574
Abstract
Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (Global Precipitation Measurement) (IMERG) is the primary high spatiotemporal resolution precipitation product of the GPM era. To assess the applicability of the latest released IMERG_V07 in mainland China, this study systematically evaluates the error characteristics of IMERG_V07 from [...] Read more.
Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (Global Precipitation Measurement) (IMERG) is the primary high spatiotemporal resolution precipitation product of the GPM era. To assess the applicability of the latest released IMERG_V07 in mainland China, this study systematically evaluates the error characteristics of IMERG_V07 from the perspective of different seasons, precipitation intensity, topography, and climate regions on an hourly scale. Ground-based meteorological observations are used as the reference, and the performance improvement of IMERG_V07 relative to IMERG_V06 is verified. Error evaluation is conducted in terms of precipitation amount and precipitation frequency, and an improved error component procedure is utilized to trace the error sources. The results indicate that IMERG_V07 exhibits a smaller RMSE in mainland China, especially with significant improvements in the southeastern region. IMERG_V07 shows better consistency with ground station data. IMERG_V07 shows an overall improvement of approximately 4% in capturing regional average precipitation events compared to IMERG_V06, with the northwest region showing particularly notable enhancement. The error components of IMERG_V06 and IMERG_V07 exhibit similar spatial distributions. IMERG_V07 outperforms V06 in terms of lower Missed bias but slightly underperforms in Hit bias and False bias compared to IMERG_V06. IMERG_V07 shows improved ability in capturing precipitation frequency for different intensities, but challenges remain in capturing heavy precipitation events, missing light precipitation, and winter precipitation events. Both IMERG_V06 and IMERG_V07 exhibit notable topography dependency in terms of Total bias and error components. False bias is the primary error source for both versions, except in winter, where high-altitude regions (DEM > 1200 m) primarily contribute to Missed bias. IMERG_V07 has enhanced the accuracy of precipitation retrieval in high-altitude areas, but there are still limitations in capturing precipitation events. Compared to IMERG_V06, IMERG_V07 demonstrates more concentrated error component values in the four climatic regions, with reduced data dispersion and significant improvement in Missed bias. The algorithm improvements in IMERG_V07 have the most significant impact in arid regions. False bias serves as the primary error source for both satellite-based precipitation estimations in the four climatic regions, with a secondary contribution from Hit bias. The evaluation results of this study offer scientific references for enhancing the algorithm of IMERG products and enhancing users’ understanding of error characteristics and sources in IMERG. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) Digital elevation model (DEM) and (<b>b</b>) locations of meteorological stations in mainland China.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Spatial distribution of precipitation for meteorological stations (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>), IMERG_V06 (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>), and IMERG_V07 (<b>i</b>–<b>l</b>) over four seasons (spring, summer, autumn, and winter).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Spatial distribution of Bias (<b>a</b>,<b>e</b>), CC (<b>b</b>,<b>f</b>), RB (<b>c</b>,<b>g</b>), and RMSE (<b>d</b>,<b>h</b>) between hourly precipitation data from SPEs and observations. Regional averaged values for BIAS (mm), CC, RB (%), and RMSE (mm/h) are shown in the color-coded barplots. The <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis numbers 1–4 correspond to humid, semi-humid, semi-arid, and arid regions, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Taylor diagrams showing CC, STD, and RMSE of hourly mean precipitation between SPE and observations in different seasons: (<b>a</b>) spring; (<b>b</b>) summer; (<b>c</b>) autumn; and (<b>d</b>) winter.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Hourly-scale spatial distribution of categorical statistical indexes (POD, MIS, FAR) for IMERG_V06 (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) and IMERG_V07 (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) with a 0.1 mm/hour precipitation/no precipitation threshold. The barplot with different colors indicates the regional averaged values for POD, MIS, and FAR with a unit of %. The <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis numbers 1–4 correspond to humid, semi-humid, semi-arid, and arid regions, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Spatial distribution of error components at hourly scales for IMERG_V06 (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) and IMERG_V07 (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>). The inserted barplot with different colors indicates the regional averaged values for Total bias and different error components with a unit of mm/h. The <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis numbers 1–4 correspond to humid, semi-humid, semi-arid, and arid regions, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Hourly precipitation classification metrics for IMERG SPEs at different intensities in spring (<b>a</b>,<b>e</b>), summer (<b>b</b>,<b>f</b>), autumn (<b>c</b>,<b>g</b>) and winter (<b>d</b>,<b>h</b>) in mainland China. Note that different <span class="html-italic">Y</span>-axis limits are used in <a href="#remotesensing-16-02671-f007" class="html-fig">Figure 7</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Categorical statistical indices (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) and RMSE (<b>c</b>–<b>h</b>) as a function of elevation for IMERG SPEs in spring, summer, autumn, and winter.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Schematic representation of the total bias and error components as a function of altitude for IMERG SPEs in spring (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>), summer (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>), autumn (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>), and winter (<b>g</b>,<b>h</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Plots of Total bias and error component half violins for IMERG SPEs in the humid (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>), semi-humid (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>), semi-arid (<b>i</b>–<b>l</b>), and arid (<b>m</b>–<b>p</b>) regions.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 5448 KiB  
Article
IMERG in the Canadian Precipitation Analysis (CaPA) System for Winter Applications
by Stéphane Bélair, Pei-Ning Feng, Franck Lespinas, Dikra Khedhaouiria, David Hudak, Daniel Michelson, Catherine Aubry, Florence Beaudry, Marco L. Carrera and Julie M. Thériault
Atmosphere 2024, 15(7), 763; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15070763 - 27 Jun 2024
Viewed by 676
Abstract
Several configurations of the Canadian Precipitation Analysis system (CaPA) currently produce precipitation analyses at Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC). To improve CaPA’s performance during the winter season, the impact of assimilating the IMERG V06 product (IMERG: Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM—Global Precipitation [...] Read more.
Several configurations of the Canadian Precipitation Analysis system (CaPA) currently produce precipitation analyses at Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC). To improve CaPA’s performance during the winter season, the impact of assimilating the IMERG V06 product (IMERG: Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM—Global Precipitation Measurement mission) into CaPA is examined in this study. Tests are conducted with CaPA’s 10 km deterministic version, evaluated over Canada and the northern part of the United States (USA). Maps from a case study show that IMERG plays a contradictory role in the production of CaPA’s precipitation analyses for a synoptic-scale winter storm over North America’s eastern coast. While its contribution appears to be physically correct over southern portions of the meteorological system, and early in its intensification phase, IMERG displays unrealistic spatial structures over land later in the system’s life cycle when it is located over northern (colder) areas. Objective evaluation of CaPA’s analyses when IMERG is assimilated without any restrictions shows an overall decrease in precipitation, which has a mixed effect (positive and negative) on the bias indicators. But IMERG’s influence on the Equitable Threat Score (ETS), a measure of CaPA’s analyses accuracy, is clearly negative. Using IMERG’s quality index (QI) to filter out areas where it is less accurate improves CaPA’s objective evaluation, leading to better ETS versus the control experiment in which no IMERG data are assimilated. Several diagnostics provide insight into the nature of IMERG’s contribution to CaPA. For the most successful configuration, with a QI threshold of 0.3, IMERG’s impact is mostly found in the warmer parts of the domain, i.e., in northern US states and in British Columbia. Spatial means of the temporal sums of absolute differences between CaPA’s analyses with and without IMERG indicate that this product also contributes meaningfully over land areas covered by snow, and areas where air temperature is below −2 °C (where precipitation is assumed to be in solid phase). Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Atmospheric Techniques, Instruments, and Modeling)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Spatial domain used in this study for the evaluation of CaPA’s precipitation analyses. The location of observations assimilated by CaPA for a specific date (1200 UTC 7 January 2022) is shown. These stations are identified with a color code indicating the network they belong to. The network partners are listed in [<a href="#B42-atmosphere-15-00763" class="html-bibr">42</a>]. Super stations refer to the combination of at least two stations that are very close to each other.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Synoptic meteorological situation at 0000 UTC (<b>top panel</b>) and 1800 UTC (<b>bottom panel</b>) 17 January 2022, from ECCC’s global deterministic atmospheric analyses. The color shadings represent screen-level air temperature (°C). The full lines are for the sea-level pressure (hPa), with “H” and “L” referring to high- and low-pressure centers, respectively. The dashed lines are for 500 hPa geopotential height (dam). The arrows are for winds at the surface (m·s<sup>−1</sup>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Six-hourly precipitation (mm) between 16 January 2022 at 1800 UTC and 17 January 2022 at 0000 UTC for (<b>a</b>) CTRL analysis, (<b>b</b>) first guess, (<b>c</b>) IMERG-ALL analysis, and (<b>d</b>) IMERG product assimilated in CaPA. The discontinuity in the lower left corner of the figure is associated with the southern border of the analysis domain (<a href="#atmosphere-15-00763-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Same as <a href="#atmosphere-15-00763-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a> but for 6-hourly precipitation (mm) between 1200 UTC and 1800 UTC on 17 January 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Objective evaluation of IMERG-ALL (full lines) versus CTRL (dashed lines) over the domain shown in <a href="#atmosphere-15-00763-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a> for the period from 1 December 2021 to 31 March 2022. The upper panels are for POD, FAR, and ETS. The lower panels are for FBI-1 and the partial means (see <a href="#app1-atmosphere-15-00763" class="html-app">Appendix A</a> for definitions). Objective evaluation is performed with LOOCV for CaPA’s 6-hourly precipitation analyses against surface synoptic manual observations. Filled symbols indicate that the differences between the two experiments are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level, based on the bootstrap method (not the case for open symbols). It should be noted that the thresholds (“x” axis) for the partial means are different from the other panels, in order to reach asymptotic behavior for large accumulations. Horizontal lines indicate zero values for FBI-1 and partial sums.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Same as <a href="#atmosphere-15-00763-f005" class="html-fig">Figure 5</a>, but for the objective evaluation of IMERG-0p4 (full red lines) versus CTRL (dashed black lines).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Frequency distribution of IMERG quality index (in percentage) for the domain shown in <a href="#atmosphere-15-00763-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a> and for the analysis period from 1 December 2021 to 31 March 2022. Results are shown over (<b>a</b>) land only, (<b>b</b>) water only, (<b>c</b>) land for points where snow depth is greater than 1 cm, and (<b>d</b>) land for points where air temperature is below −2 °C. The numbers in the upper-right corners indicate the percentage of grid points considered in each panel (top number) and of realizations for which the quality index is over 0.3 and 0.4 (bottom two numbers). Grid points with negative QIs are not accounted for in the histograms.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Same as <a href="#atmosphere-15-00763-f005" class="html-fig">Figure 5</a> and <a href="#atmosphere-15-00763-f006" class="html-fig">Figure 6</a> but for the objective evaluation of IMERG-0p3 (full magenta lines) versus CTRL (dashed black lines).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Air temperature at the screen level (°C, <b>left panels</b>), IMERG quality index (<b>middle panels</b>), and snow depth (cm) analysis from CaLDAS (right panels), temporally averaged between 1800 UTC on 16 January 2022 and 0000 UTC on 17 January 2022 (upper panels) and between 1200 UTC and 1800 UTC on 17 January 2022 (<b>lower panels</b>). The bold lines show the 1.0 mm contour for the 6-hourly CTRL precipitation analyses, consistent with <a href="#atmosphere-15-00763-f003" class="html-fig">Figure 3</a> and <a href="#atmosphere-15-00763-f004" class="html-fig">Figure 4</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Temporal means and sums of the IMERG contribution for winter 2022 obtained by comparing 6-hourly precipitation analyses from CTRL and IMERG-ALL experiments. The left panels show the absolute (mm, upper panel, based on Equation (<a href="#FD2-atmosphere-15-00763" class="html-disp-formula">2</a>)) and normalized (lower panel, Equation (<a href="#FD3-atmosphere-15-00763" class="html-disp-formula">3</a>)) differences between the two experiments. The panels on the right indicate the fraction (%, based on Equation (<a href="#FD7-atmosphere-15-00763" class="html-disp-formula">7</a>)) of the absolute differences that occur over areas where snow depth is greater than 1 cm (<b>upper panel</b>) and where air temperature is below −2 °C (<b>lower panel</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Similar to the left panels in <a href="#atmosphere-15-00763-f010" class="html-fig">Figure 10</a>. The IMERG contribution for winter 2022 is obtained by comparing 6-hourly precipitation analyses from CTRL and the IMERG-0p4 (<b>top</b>) and IMERG-0p3 (<b>bottom</b>) experiments. The absolute (mm, left panels, Equation (<a href="#FD2-atmosphere-15-00763" class="html-disp-formula">2</a>)) and normalized (right panels, Equation (<a href="#FD3-atmosphere-15-00763" class="html-disp-formula">3</a>)) differences are shown.</p>
Full article ">
17 pages, 5118 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of GPM IMERG Satellite Precipitation Products in Event-Based Flood Modeling over the Sunshui River Basin in Southwestern China
by Xiaoyu Lyu, Zhanling Li and Xintong Li
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(13), 2333; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16132333 - 26 Jun 2024
Viewed by 1192
Abstract
This study evaluates the applicability of hourly Global Precipitation Measurement Mission (GPM) Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (IMERG) data for event-based flood modeling in the Sunshui River Basin, southwestern China, using the hydrologic modeling system (HEC-HMS) model. The accuracies of IMERG V6, IMERG [...] Read more.
This study evaluates the applicability of hourly Global Precipitation Measurement Mission (GPM) Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (IMERG) data for event-based flood modeling in the Sunshui River Basin, southwestern China, using the hydrologic modeling system (HEC-HMS) model. The accuracies of IMERG V6, IMERG V7, and the corrected IMERG V7 satellite precipitation products (SPPs) were assessed against ground rainfall observations. The performance of flood modeling based on the original and the corrected SPPs was then evaluated and compared. In addition, the ability of different numbers (one–eight) of ground stations to correct IMERG V7 data for flood modeling was investigated. The results indicate that IMERG V6 data generally underestimate the actual rainfall of the study area, while IMERG V7 and the corrected IMERG V7 data using the geographical discrepancy analysis (GDA) method overestimate rainfall. The corrected IMERG V7 data performed best in capturing the actual rainfall events, followed by IMERG V7 and IMERG V6 data, respectively. The IMERG V7-generated flood hydrographs exhibited the same trend as those of the measured data, yet the former generally overestimated the flood peak due to its overestimation of rainfall. The corrected IMERG V7 data led to superior event-based flood modeling performance compared to the other datasets. Furthermore, when the number of ground stations used to correct the IMERG V7 data in the study area was greater than or equal to four, the flood modeling performance was satisfactory. The results confirm the applicability of IMERG V7 data for fine time scales in event-based flood modeling and reveal that using the GDA method to correct SPPs can greatly enhance the accuracy of flood modeling. This study can act as a basis for flood research in data-scarce areas. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The framework of this study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Location of the Sunshui River basin in China.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Land use types (<b>a</b>) and soil types (<b>b</b>) in the Sunshui River basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Distributions of satellite grid points and ground gauge stations in the Sunshui River basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Scatter plot of IMERG V6, V7, and corrected IMERG V7 data with ground observation data. The value of the color bar represents the density value of the color in the scatter plot.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Simulated and observed flood hydrographs from 2014 to 2016 in the Sunshui River basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Simulated and observed flood hydrographs from 2017 to 2018 in the Sunshui River basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Flood modeling based on the corrected IMERG V7 data using one to eight ground gauge stations in the Sunshui River basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Boxplot of the evaluation indicators for flood modeling based on the corrected IMERG V7 data using one to eight ground gauge stations in the Sunshui River basin (Black diamonds in the box plot indicate outliers. The red, blue, and green dashed lines represent the thresholds of the model performance levels for ‘satisfactory’, ‘good’, and ‘very good’, respectively).</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 6109 KiB  
Article
Evaluating the Performance and Applicability of Satellite Precipitation Products over the Rio Grande–San Juan Basin in Northeast Mexico
by Dariela A. Vázquez-Rodríguez, Víctor H. Guerra-Cobián, José L. Bruster-Flores, Carlos R. Fonseca and Fabiola D. Yépez-Rincón
Atmosphere 2024, 15(7), 749; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15070749 - 22 Jun 2024
Viewed by 712
Abstract
Accurate observation of precipitation data is crucial for hydrometeorological applications, requiring temporal and spatial precision. Satellite precipitation products offer a promising solution for obtaining precipitation estimates, facilitating long-term observations from global to local scales. However, assessing their accuracy compared to rain gauge observations [...] Read more.
Accurate observation of precipitation data is crucial for hydrometeorological applications, requiring temporal and spatial precision. Satellite precipitation products offer a promising solution for obtaining precipitation estimates, facilitating long-term observations from global to local scales. However, assessing their accuracy compared to rain gauge observations is essential. This study aims to assess the accuracy and applicability of precipitation data from CMORPH, IMERG, and PERSIANN CCS in the Rio Grande–San Juan Basin in northeast Mexico. The evaluation of estimated precipitation was assessed using the Pearson and Spearman correlations, RMSE, MAE, and BIAS for both monthly and yearly averages. CMORPH showed minimal errors and low underestimation, while IMERG exhibited high correlations with consistent underestimation. PERSIANN CCS had lower correlations, significant overestimation, and higher errors. The Mann–Kendall (MK) test was used to determinate the precipitation trends of observed and estimated data. The observed data showed a significant positive trend in monthly averages, which is not reflected in the annual trend. Furthermore, negative annual trends were found in at least 10 stations across the basin. The application of satellite precipitation data yielded mixed outcomes, with CMORPH showing the highest level of agreement with the trend analysis results from rain gauge data. This demonstrates its reliability for weather and climate studies and suggests the potential for CMORPH to be used as an input in hydrological modeling. Full article
(This article belongs to the Topic Hydrology and Water Resources Management)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location of the Rio Grande–San Juan basin in northeast Mexico, and stations (whose colors represent denote the region).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Monthly Precipitation Averages: Observed vs. Satellite Products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Distribution comparison of monthly precipitation: observed vs. values estimated from satellite products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Monthly correlations for each satellite product. (<b>a</b>) Shows results for Pearson correlations, while (<b>b</b>) shows Spearman correlations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Error by for month for each satellite product: (<b>a</b>) mean absolute error and (<b>b</b>) root mean square error.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Monthly bias showing the underestimation and overestimation by satellite products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Spatial distribution of evaluation statistics for monthly estimated precipitation by three precipitation products over Rio Grande–San Juan Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Annual precipitation by weather stations and estimation of precipitation with satellite products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Spatial distribution of evaluation statistics for annual estimated precipitation by three precipitation products over Rio Grande–San Juan Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Spatial distribution of Mann–Kendall’s monthly trends over the Rio Grande–San Juan basin for ground observations and satellite precipitation products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Spatial distribution of Mann–Kendall annual trends over the Rio Grande–San Juan basin for ground observations and satellite precipitation products.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 6370 KiB  
Article
Unveiling the Accuracy of New-Generation Satellite Rainfall Estimates across Bolivia’s Complex Terrain
by Silvia Roxana Mattos Gutierrez, Ayele Almaw Fenta, Taye Minichil Meshesha and Ashebir Sewale Belay
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(12), 2211; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16122211 - 18 Jun 2024
Viewed by 1062
Abstract
This study evaluated the accuracy of two new generation satellite rainfall estimates (SREs): Climate Hazards Group InfraRed Precipitation with Station data (CHIRPS) and Integrated Multi-satellite Retrieval for GPM (IMERG) over Bolivia’s complex terrain. These SREs were compared against rainfall data from rain gauge [...] Read more.
This study evaluated the accuracy of two new generation satellite rainfall estimates (SREs): Climate Hazards Group InfraRed Precipitation with Station data (CHIRPS) and Integrated Multi-satellite Retrieval for GPM (IMERG) over Bolivia’s complex terrain. These SREs were compared against rainfall data from rain gauge measurements on a point-to-pixel basis for the period 2002–2020. The evaluation was performed across three regions with distinct topographical settings: Altiplano (Highland), Valles (Midland), and Llanos (Lowland). IMERG exhibited better accuracy in rainfall detection than CHIRPS, with the highest rainfall detection skills observed in the Highland region. However, IMERG’s higher rainfall detection skill was countered by its higher false alarm ratio. CHIRPS provided a more accurate estimation of rainfall amounts across the three regions, exhibiting low random errors and relative biases below 10%. IMERG tended to overestimate rainfall amounts, with marked overestimation by up to 75% in the Highland region. Bias decomposition revealed that IMERG’s high false rainfall bias contributed to its marked overestimation of rainfall. We showcase the utility of long-term CHIRPS data to investigate spatio-temporal rainfall patterns and meteorological drought occurrence in Bolivia. The findings of this study offer valuable insights for choosing appropriate SREs for informed decision-making, particularly in regions of complex topography lacking reliable gauge data. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Location map of Bolivia showing the rainfall gauging stations used for this study. The background provides elevation information extracted from ALOS PALSAR (Phased Array L-band Synthetic Aperture Radar on the Advanced Land Observing Satellite).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Monthly mean gauge-based rainfall (2002–2020) averaged for the Highland, Midland, and Lowland stations. Vertical bars represent standard deviation monthly rainfall.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Scatter plots of daily SREs versus gauge measurements for the period 2002–2020 across the Highland, Midland, and Lowland regions of Bolivia.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scatter plots of monthly SREs versus gauge measurements for the period 2002–2020 across the Highland, Midland, and Lowland regions of Bolivia.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison of long-term mean monthly rainfall estimates by the SREs for the period 2002–2020 across the three regions of Bolivia. Vertical bars represent standard deviation monthly rainfall.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Quantile maps showing spatial distribution of (<b>a</b>) average annual rainfall (mm year–1), (<b>b</b>) coefficient of variation of annual rainfall, (<b>c</b>) wet season rainfall (mm season–1), (<b>d</b>) coefficient of variation of wet season rainfall, (<b>e</b>) dry season rainfall (mm season–1), and (<b>f</b>) coefficient of variation of dry season rainfall, during the period 1981–2020 based on CHIRPS data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Standardized annual rainfall over the three regions of Bolivia normalized with respect to the 1981–2020 average based on CHIRPS data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Spatial distribution of standardized precipitation index (SPI) for December–February of 1995 and 2016 (drought years) and 2018 (a normal year) based on CHIRPS data.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 2965 KiB  
Technical Note
Evaluation of IMERG Data over Open Ocean Using Observations of Tropical Cyclones
by Stephen L. Durden
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(11), 2028; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16112028 - 5 Jun 2024
Viewed by 592
Abstract
The IMERG data product is an optimal combination of precipitation estimates from the Global Precipitation Mission (GPM), making use of a variety of data types, primarily data from various spaceborne passive instruments. Previous versions of the IMERG product have been extensively validated by [...] Read more.
The IMERG data product is an optimal combination of precipitation estimates from the Global Precipitation Mission (GPM), making use of a variety of data types, primarily data from various spaceborne passive instruments. Previous versions of the IMERG product have been extensively validated by comparisons with gauge data and ground-based radars over land. However, IMERG rain rates, especially sub-daily, over open ocean are less validated due to the scarcity of comparison data, particularly with the relatively new Version 07. To address this issue, we consider IMERG V07 30-min data acquired in tropical cyclones over open ocean. We perform two tasks. The first is a straightforward comparison between IMERG precipitation rates and those retrieved from the GPM Dual-frequency Precipitation Radar (DPR). From this, we find that IMERG and DPR are close at low rain rates, while, at high rain rates, IMERG tends to be lower than DPR. The second task is the assessment of IMERG’s ability to represent or detect structures commonly seen in tropical cyclones, including the annular structure and concentric eyewalls. For this, we operate on IMERG data with many machine learning algorithms and are able to achieve a 96% classification accuracy, indicating that IMERG does indeed contain TC structural information. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Remote Sensing and Parameterization of Air-Sea Interaction)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Flow chart of both analysis tasks completed in this paper. The DPR comparison is the upper part of the chart, while the process of doing the ML classification of IMERG only is illustrated in the lower part.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>IMERG and DPR data for TC Surigae 2021 02W 04181507 (format mmddhhmm). (<b>a</b>) IMERG surface rain rate (mm/h). (<b>b</b>) DPR rain rate. (<b>c</b>) IMERG minus the DPR rain rate. (<b>d</b>) Plots of AARR using IMERG and DPR data. Time is the UTC time of the DPR overpass.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Same as <a href="#remotesensing-16-02028-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a> but for TC Bolaven 2023 15W 10112342. (<b>a</b>) IMERG surface rain rate (mm/h). (<b>b</b>) DPR rain rate. (<b>c</b>) IMERG minus the DPR rain rate. (<b>d</b>) Plots of AARR using IMERG and DPR data. Time is the UTC time of the DPR overpass.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Same as <a href="#remotesensing-16-02028-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a> but for TC Dorian 2019 05L 08302132. (<b>a</b>) IMERG surface rain rate (mm/h). (<b>b</b>) DPR rain rate. (<b>c</b>) IMERG minus the DPR rain rate. (<b>d</b>) Plots of AARR using IMERG and DPR data. Time is the UTC time of the DPR overpass.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Example images of the IMERG rainfall rate for the four classes: (<b>a</b>) Olivia 2018 17E, class 0, 0600 UTC on Sep 6, (<b>b</b>) Isabel 2003 13L, class 1, 1800 UTC on Sep 11, (<b>c</b>) Larry 2021 12L, class 2, 0000 UTC on Sep 6, and (<b>d</b>) Barbara 2019 02E, class 3, 0000 UTC on Jul 3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Example radial plots for 4 TCs in each class. The date and time are given in mmddhhmm format after each name and number. (<b>a</b>) Class 0, Olivia 2018 17E 09060600, Longwang 2005 19W 09291200, Hector 2018 10E 08070530, Champi 2018 25W 07090600. (<b>b</b>) Class 1, Marie 2014 13E 08251800, Isabel 2003 13L 09111800, Frances 2004 06L 09010700, Maria 10W 2018 07090600, (<b>c</b>) class 2, Linda 2021 12E 08150800, Larry 2021 12L 09060000, Noru 07W 2017 08021800, Surigae 2021 02W 04201800, and (<b>d</b>) class 3, Barbara 2019 02E 07030000, Irma 2017 11L 09050000, Goni 2020 22W 10311200, Chanthu 2021 19W 09071200.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Classification results for the KNN classifier with <span class="html-italic">K</span> = 1, using 6-h averages of AARRs. Accuracies for correct classification are highlighted in blue.</p>
Full article ">
18 pages, 4992 KiB  
Article
Assessment of Satellite Products in Estimating Tropical Cyclone Remote Precipitation over the Yangtze River Delta Region
by Xinyue Wu, Yebing Liu, Shulan Liu, Yubing Jin and Huiyan Xu
Atmosphere 2024, 15(6), 667; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15060667 - 31 May 2024
Viewed by 482
Abstract
Satellite products have shown great potential in estimating torrential rainfall due to their wide and consistent global coverage. This study assessed the monitoring capabilities of satellite products for the tropical cyclone remote precipitation (TRP) over the Yangtze River Delta region (YRDR) associated with [...] Read more.
Satellite products have shown great potential in estimating torrential rainfall due to their wide and consistent global coverage. This study assessed the monitoring capabilities of satellite products for the tropical cyclone remote precipitation (TRP) over the Yangtze River Delta region (YRDR) associated with severe typhoon Khanun (2017) and super-typhoon Mangkhut (2018). The satellite products include the CPC MORPHing technique (CMORPH) data, Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission 3B42 Version 7 (TRMM 3B42), and Integrated Multi-satellite Retrievals for the Global Precipitation Measurement Mission (GPM IMERG). Eight precision evaluation indexes and statistical methods were used to analyze and evaluate the monitoring capabilities of CMORPH, TRMM 3B42, and GPM IMERG satellite precipitation products. The results indicated that the monitoring capability of TRMM satellite precipitation products was superior in capturing the spatial distribution, and GPM products captured the temporal distributions and different category precipitation observed from gauge stations. In contrast, the CMORPH products performed moderately during two heavy rainfall events, often underestimating or overestimating precipitation amounts and inaccurately detecting precipitation peaks. Overall, the three satellite precipitation products showed low POD, high FAR, low TS, and high FBIAS for heavy rainfall events, and the differences in monitoring torrential TRP may be related to satellite retrieval algorithms. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Meteorology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of (<b>a</b>) southeastern regions of China, and (<b>b</b>) the Yangtze River Delta region (YRDR) study area and locations of meteorological stations. The red points represent the locations of meteorological stations. JS, SH, AH, and ZJ denote Jiangsu, Shanghai, Anhui, and Zhejiang provinces, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Twenty-four-hour cumulative rainfall from observations and satellite data: (<b>a</b>) observations (OBS means observations), (<b>b</b>) CMORPH, (<b>c</b>) TRMM, and (<b>d</b>) GPM from 0000 UTC, 15 October to 0000 UTC, 16 October 2017; the unit is mm. The stars of JS, SH, ZJ denote Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Zhejiang, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Twenty-four-hour cumulative rainfall from observations and satellite datasets: (<b>a</b>) observations (OBS means observations), (<b>b</b>) CMORPH, (<b>c</b>) TRMM, and (<b>d</b>) GPM from 1200 UTC, 16 September to 1200 UTC, 16 September 2018; the unit is mm. The stars of YC, HZ, NB denote Yancheng of Jiangsu province, Hangzhou, and Ningbo of Zhejiang province, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scatter chart of 24 h accumulated precipitation at weather stations and (<b>a</b>) CMORPH, (<b>b</b>) GPM, and (<b>c</b>) TRMM 24 h accumulated precipitation during the period from 0000 UTC, 15 October 2017 to 0000 UTC, 16 October 2017; the unit is mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Scatter plots of 24 h accumulated precipitation at different meteorological stations and (<b>a</b>) CMORPH, (<b>b</b>) GPM, and (<b>c</b>) TRMM of 24 h accumulated precipitation during the period from 1200 UTC, 16 September to 1200 UTC, 16 September 2018; the unit is mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Three-hour average precipitation from observations and satellite datasets, (<b>b</b>) RMSE, (<b>c</b>) BIAS, (<b>d</b>) MAE between observations and rainfall from CMORPH, TRMM, and GPM from 00:00 UTC, 15 October to 00:00 UTC, 16 October 2017; the unit is mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) Three-hour average precipitation data from observations, (<b>b</b>) RMSE, (<b>c</b>) BIAS, (<b>d</b>) MAE between observations and satellite rainfall from CMORPH, TRMM, and GPM from 12:00 UTC, 16 September to 12:00 UTC, 17 September 2018; the unit is mm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>(<b>a</b>) POD, (<b>b</b>) FAR, (<b>c</b>) TS, and (<b>d</b>) FBIAS for CMORPH, TRMM, and GPM based on different thresholds from 0000 UTC, 15 October 2017 to 0000 UTC, 16 October 2017.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) POD, (<b>b</b>) FAR, (<b>c</b>) TS, and (<b>d</b>) FBIAS for CMORPH, TRMM, and GPM based on various thresholds from 1200 UTC, 16 September to 1200 UTC, 16 September 2018.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 6759 KiB  
Article
Flash Flood Risk Assessment in the Asir Region, Southwestern Saudi Arabia, Using a Physically-Based Distributed Hydrological Model and GPM IMERG Satellite Rainfall Data
by Abdelrahim Salih and Abdalhaleem Hassablla
Atmosphere 2024, 15(6), 624; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15060624 - 23 May 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1025
Abstract
Floods in southwestern Saudi Arabia, especially in the Asir region, are among the major natural disasters caused by natural and human factors. In this region, flash floods that occur in the Wadi Hail Basin greatly affect human life and activities, damaging property, the [...] Read more.
Floods in southwestern Saudi Arabia, especially in the Asir region, are among the major natural disasters caused by natural and human factors. In this region, flash floods that occur in the Wadi Hail Basin greatly affect human life and activities, damaging property, the built environment, infrastructure, landscapes, and facilities. A previous study carried out for the same basin has effectively revealed zones of flood risk using such an approach. However, the utilization of the HEC–HMS (Hydrologic Engineering Center–Hydrologic Modeling System) model and IMERG data for delineating areas prone to flash floods remain unexplored. In response to this advantage, this work primarily focused on flood generation assessment in the Wadi Hail Basin, one of the major basins in the region that is frequently prone to severe flash flood damage, from a single extreme rainfall event. We employed a fully physical-based, distributed hydrological model run with HEC–HMS software version 4.11 and Integrated Multi-satellite Retrievals of Global Precipitation Measurement (IMERG V.06) data, as well as other geo-environmental variables, to simulate the water flow within the Wadi Basin, and predict flash flood hazard. Discharge from the wadi and its sub-basins was predicted using 1 mm rainfall over an 8-h occurrence time. Significant peak discharge (3.6 m3/s) was found in eastern and southern upstream sub-basins and crossing points, rather than those downstream, due to their high-density drainage network (0.12) and CNs (88.4). Generally, four flood hazard levels were identified in the study basin: ‘low risk’, ‘moderate risk’, ‘high risk’, and ‘very high risk’. It was found that 43.8% of the total area of the Wadi Hail Basin is highly prone to flooding. Furthermore, medium- and low-hazard areas make up 4.5–11.2% of the total area, respectively. We found that the peak discharge value of sub-basin 11 (1.8 m3/s) covers 13.2% of the total Wadi Hail area; so, it poses more flood risk than other Wadi Hail sub-basins. The obtained results demonstrated the usefulness of the methods used to develop useful hydrological information in a region lacking ungagged data. This study will play a useful role in identifying the impact of extreme rainfall events on locations that may be susceptible to flash flooding, which will help authorities to develop flood management strategies, particularly in response to extreme events. The study results have potential and valuable policy implications for planners and decision-makers regarding infrastructural development and ensuring environmental stability. The study recommends further research to understand how flash flood hazards correlate with changes at different land use/cover (LULC) classes. This could refine flash flood hazards results and maximize its effectiveness. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Overview of the study region: on the left side is a map of Saudi Arabia while on the right side is the study site location (Wadi Hail), which is located in Asir Province.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Topographic characteristics of Wadi Hail, where (<b>a</b>) is the surface elevation (m) and (<b>b</b>) is the slope (degrees).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Average annual rainfall regime in the wadi catchment. This was interpolated from data obtained from the Precipitation Measurement Mission (PMM) website (<a href="http://pmm.nasa.gov/data-access/download/gpm" target="_blank">http://pmm.nasa.gov/data-access/download/gpm</a>, accessed on 22 November 2023). The numbers show the sub-basins ID, according to the HEC-HMS model output.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>A simplified flowchart of the adopted methodology of HEC–HMS model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Landsat imagery (bands 5, 4, &amp; 3), (<b>b</b>) LULC of the wadi basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) SRTM-DEM and (<b>b</b>) delineated drainage network (blue lines) using 8D flow direction algorithm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>(<b>a</b>) Soil texture and (<b>b</b>) surface geological data for Wadi Hail Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The hydrological soil group map (HSG) of the wadi’s catchments. The numbers show the sub-basins ID, according to the HEC-HMS model output.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Cumulative curve number (CN) map of the stream watersheds. The numbers show the sub-basins ID, according to the HEC-HMS model output.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Total IMERG rainfall (<b>a</b>) Late, (<b>b</b>) Early, and (<b>c</b>) Final for the 23 May 2015 event over the Saudi Arabia regions. The blue frame shows the location of the study basin. For more clarification, the rainfall over the wadi catchment was clipped and showed in <a href="#atmosphere-15-00624-f011" class="html-fig">Figure 11</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Rainfall totals (presented as (<b>a</b>) Final, (<b>b</b>) Early, and (<b>c</b>) Late) over the Wadi Hail catchment for the 23 May 2015 storm event estimated by the three IMERG products utilizing the IDW interpolation algorithm.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Modeled hydrographs showing the range of expected discharges for the five selected sub-basins of Wadi Hail under hypothetical 1 mm rainstorms for 8 h. The numbers in the upper right inset show the subbasins ID, according to the HEC-HMS model output.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>A map view depicting the 20 upstream sub-basins that drain toward the Red Sea and their risk levels on the King Abdulaziz Highway. These risk levels were classified based on the sub-basins’ physiographic characteristics, drainage density, soil texture, and peak discharge (<a href="#atmosphere-15-00624-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>). The numbers in the upper right inset show the subbasins ID, according to the HEC-HMS model output. In the right side is a close-up view of the site classified as being at extreme flood risk.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Model-derived hydrographs of the six selected sub-basins: (<b>a</b>) sub-basin 1, (<b>b</b>) sub-basin 5, (<b>c</b>) sub-basin 6, (<b>d</b>) sub-basin 15, (<b>e</b>) sub-basin 23, and (<b>f</b>) sub-basin 11, because of the March 2015 rainstorm. Sub-basin number 11 was selected as the basin that was characterized by a high level of flood risk due to its physiographic characteristics.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>The three-dimensional “oblique perspective” of the downstream area of Wadi Hail. Where, (<b>a</b>) is a Multispectral Landsat image overlaid on a 90 m SRTM-DEM. The white arrow indicates the city of Muhayil, (<b>b</b>) is a zoomed area of sub-basin No. 11. With many houses surrounding this area, the risk of flood inundation remains a concern. The blue lines show the closest stream to the city of Muhayil, while the white arrows indicate areas at risk of flooding.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 7654 KiB  
Article
An Innovative Correction–Fusion Approach for Multi-Satellite Precipitation Products Conditioned by Gauge Background Fields over the Lancang River Basin
by Linjiang Nan, Mingxiang Yang, Hao Wang, Hejia Wang and Ningpeng Dong
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(11), 1824; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16111824 - 21 May 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 723
Abstract
Satellite precipitation products can help improve precipitation estimates where ground-based observations are lacking; however, their relative accuracy and applicability in data-scarce areas remain unclear. Here, we evaluated the accuracy of different satellite precipitation datasets for the Lancang River Basin, Western China, including the [...] Read more.
Satellite precipitation products can help improve precipitation estimates where ground-based observations are lacking; however, their relative accuracy and applicability in data-scarce areas remain unclear. Here, we evaluated the accuracy of different satellite precipitation datasets for the Lancang River Basin, Western China, including the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) 3B42RT, the Global Precipitation Measurement Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals (GPM IMERG), and Fengyun 2G (FY-2G) datasets. The results showed that GPM IMERG and FY-2G are superior to TRMM 3B42RT for meeting local research needs. A subsequent bias correction on these two datasets significantly increased the correlation coefficient and probability of detection of the products and reduced error indices such as the root mean square error and mean absolute error. To further improve data quality, we proposed a novel correction–fusion method based on window sliding data correction and Bayesian data fusion. Specifically, the corrected FY-2G dataset was merged with GPM IMERG Early, Late, and Final Runs. The resulting FY-Early, FY-Late, and FY-Final fusion datasets showed high correlation coefficients, strong detection performances, and few observation errors, thereby effectively extending local precipitation data sources. The results of this study provide a scientific basis for the rational use of satellite precipitation products in data-scarce areas, as well as reliable data support for precipitation forecasting and water resource management in the Lancang River Basin. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Topographic map of the study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flow chart of the proposed window sliding data correction method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Box charts showing the evaluation results for five satellite precipitation products: (<b>a</b>) the results of CC at daily scale; (<b>b</b>) the results of RMSE at daily scale; (<b>c</b>) the results of CC at monthly scale; (<b>d</b>) the results of RB at monthly scale; (<b>e</b>) the results of CC at annual scale; (<b>f</b>) the results of RB at annual scale. The different boxes in the figure represent different satellite precipitation products. CC: correlation coefficient; RMSE: root mean square error; RB: relative bias.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Radar map of SPP detection results for different precipitation grades. POD: probability of detection; FAR: false alarm rate; CSI: critical success index; ETS: fair precursor score; FBI: Frequency Bias Index.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Map of correction and validation sites in the Lancang River Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Correction effect of satellite precipitation products under different window side lengths.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Evaluation of the effect of correction for different satellite precipitation products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Spatial distribution of the correction effects for different satellite precipitation products.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Spatial distribution of CC values before and after fusion for different satellite precipitation products.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 16506 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of Near Real-Time Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Precipitation Products for Hydrological Modelling and Flood Inundation Mapping of Sparsely Gauged Large Transboundary Basins—A Case Study of the Brahmaputra Basin
by Muhammad Jawad, Biswa Bhattacharya, Adele Young and Schalk Jan van Andel
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(10), 1756; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16101756 - 15 May 2024
Viewed by 891
Abstract
Limited availability of hydrometeorological data and lack of data sharing practices have added to the challenge of hydrological modelling of large and transboundary catchments. This research evaluates the suitability of latest near real-time global precipitation measurement (GPM)-era satellite precipitation products (SPPs), IMERG-Early, IMERG-Late [...] Read more.
Limited availability of hydrometeorological data and lack of data sharing practices have added to the challenge of hydrological modelling of large and transboundary catchments. This research evaluates the suitability of latest near real-time global precipitation measurement (GPM)-era satellite precipitation products (SPPs), IMERG-Early, IMERG-Late and GSMaP-NRT, for hydrological and hydrodynamic modelling of the Brahmaputra Basin. The HEC-HMS modelling system was used for the hydrological modelling of the Brahmaputra Basin, using IMERG-Early, IMERG-Late, and GSMaP-NRT. The findings showed good results using GPM SPPs for hydrological modelling of large basins like Brahmaputra, with Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) and R2 values in the range of 0.75–0.85, and root mean square error (RMSE) between 7000 and 9000 m3 s−1, and the average discharge was 20611 m3 s−1. Output of the GPM-based hydrological models was then used as input to a 1D hydrodynamic model to assess suitability for flood inundation mapping of the Brahmaputra River. Simulated flood extents were compared with Landsat satellite-captured images of flood extents. In critical areas along the river, the probability of detection (POD) and critical success index (CSI) values were above 0.70 with all the SPPs used in this study. The accuracy of the models was found to increase when simulated using SPPs corrected with ground-based precipitation datasets. It was also found that IMERG-Late performed better than the other two precipitation products as far as hydrological modelling was concerned. However, for flood inundation mapping, all of the three selected products showed equally good results. The conclusion is reached that for sparsely gauged large basins, particularly for trans-boundary ones, GPM-era SPPs can be used for discharge simulation and flood inundation mapping. Full article
(This article belongs to the Topic Hydrology and Water Resources Management)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Catchment boundary of Brahmaputra Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flowchart representing the methodology adopted for this research.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Location of areas for flood extent validation of the hydraulic model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Validation hydrograph generated with (<b>a</b>) dataset 1, showing that low flows were not predicted well, but high flows showed a good match with observed flows; (<b>b</b>) 2, performed very similarly, a with a small improvement in low flows; (<b>c</b>) 3, both high and low flows visually performed close to observed flows; (<b>d</b>) 4, with addition of IMD data, the low flow overestimation problem of case a was resolved considerably; (<b>e</b>) 5, performed very similarly to case d with a small improvement; and (<b>f</b>) 6, both high and low flows were predicted well by the model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Taylor diagram for model performance in validation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Validation of hydraulic model (WL) at Bahadurabad.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Accuracy of the simulated inundation maps based on IMERG-Late precipitation dataset against corresponding DFO rasters.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Performance indicators of the hydraulic model for the flood event on 14 August 2017 with SPP (<b>a</b>) 1, (<b>b</b>) 2, (<b>c</b>) 3, (<b>d</b>) 4, (<b>e</b>) 5, (<b>f</b>) 6 and for the flood event on 16 July 2019 with SPP (<b>g</b>) 1, (<b>h</b>) 2, (<b>i</b>) 3, (<b>j</b>) 4, (<b>k</b>) 5, (<b>l</b>) 6.</p>
Full article ">
13 pages, 1861 KiB  
Article
Spatiotemporal Characteristics and Rainfall Thresholds of Geological Landslide Disasters in ASEAN Countries
by Weiping Lu, Zhixiang Xiao, Yuhang Chen, Jingwen Sun and Feisheng Chen
Atmosphere 2024, 15(5), 599; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15050599 - 14 May 2024
Viewed by 943
Abstract
Drawing upon a comprehensive global database of landslides and utilizing high-resolution IMERG satellite precipitation data, this study investigates the spatial and temporal variations of landslide occurrences across the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). This study constructs a region-specific, [...] Read more.
Drawing upon a comprehensive global database of landslides and utilizing high-resolution IMERG satellite precipitation data, this study investigates the spatial and temporal variations of landslide occurrences across the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). This study constructs a region-specific, graded warning system by formulating an average effective intensity–duration (ID) rainfall threshold curve for each ASEAN member. Examination of 1747 landslide events spanning from 2006 to 2018 illustrates a significant association between the frequency of landslides in ASEAN regions and the latitudinal movement of local precipitation bands. Incidences of landslides hit their lowest in March and April, while a surge is observed from October to January, correlating with the highest mortality rates. Geographical hotspots for landslide activity, characterized by substantial annual rainfall and constrained landmasses, include the Philippine archipelago, Indonesia’s Java Island, and the Malay Peninsula, each experiencing an average of over 2.5 landslides annually. Fatalities accompany approximately 41.4% of ASEAN landslide events, with the Philippines and Indonesia registering the most substantial numbers. Myanmar stands out for the proportion of large-scale landslide incidents, with an average casualty rate of 10.89 deaths per landslide, significantly surpassing other countries in the region. The ID rainfall threshold curves indicate that the Philippines experienced the highest precipitation levels before landslide initiation, whereas Myanmar has the threshold set at a considerably lower level. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Meteorology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) The variations of landslide events (gray) and death toll (red) in ASEAN nations from 2006 to 2018 by year and (<b>b</b>) their monthly variability summed to the same period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Spatiotemporal distributions of landslides in ASEAN countries (<b>a</b>) and the average annual landslide frequency (<b>b</b>); units: times per year.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Spatial distributions of the number of deaths caused by each landslide in ASEAN countries.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Number of landslides in ASEAN countries (<b>a</b>), total deaths caused (<b>b</b>), average deaths per landslide (<b>c</b>), and percentage of fatal landslide events (<b>d</b>) during 2006–2018.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Number of landslides (bar charts) and their percentages (solid line, %) with different daily rainfall amounts (mm/d) in the top six countries with the highest number of landslides.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Same as <a href="#atmosphere-15-00599-f005" class="html-fig">Figure 5</a>, but the <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis is the cumulative rainfall during the 15 days prior to the landslide’s occurring day.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p><span class="html-italic">I</span>–<span class="html-italic">D</span> threshold curves for landslide disasters in six ASEAN countries. The <span class="html-italic">y</span>-axis represents the average rainfall intensity (<span class="html-italic">I</span>, unit: mm/d), and the <span class="html-italic">x</span>-axis represents the rainfall duration (<span class="html-italic">D</span>, unit: d). The black, blue, and red solid lines represent the 50%, 10%, and 90% probability thresholds, respectively.</p>
Full article ">
17 pages, 2583 KiB  
Article
Surface Water Resources Planning in an Ungauged Transboundary Basin Using Satellite Products and the AHP Method
by Seyed Kamal Ghoreishi Gharehtikan, Saeid Gharechelou, Emad Mahjoobi, Saeed Golian, Fatemeh Rafiei and Hossein Salehi
Geographies 2024, 4(2), 304-320; https://doi.org/10.3390/geographies4020018 - 10 May 2024
Viewed by 961
Abstract
Global concern over optimizing transboundary water resources for residents is hindered by the lack of observational data, particularly in ungauged basins, mainly due to inaccessibility or security issues. Remote sensing and GIS technology provide a practical solution for monitoring and managing water resources [...] Read more.
Global concern over optimizing transboundary water resources for residents is hindered by the lack of observational data, particularly in ungauged basins, mainly due to inaccessibility or security issues. Remote sensing and GIS technology provide a practical solution for monitoring and managing water resources in such basins. This research evaluates surface water resources in the Qaretikan ungauged transboundary basin using satellite products for precipitation, temperature, and evapotranspiration from 2005 to 2014. The accuracy of these datasets was assessed using statistical measures. The water balance components, i.e., precipitation and evaporation, were utilized to calculate runoff over the basin using the Justin method. Downstream environmental flow was estimated using the Lyon method, and available water was determined. This study identified a potential annual storage water of 11.8 MCM in the Qaretikan basin. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) integrated expert opinions to prioritize water usage decisions based on proposed decision options. The results revealed greenhouse cultivation water allocation as the top priority among the identified options, highlighting its importance in sustainable water resource management within the basin. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of Iran with the location of Qaretikan basin highlighted.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flowchart methodology adopted in the research.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Spatial distribution of global meteorological data grid cells (GMGCs): (<b>a</b>) ERA5-Land grid; (<b>b</b>) IMERG grid; (<b>c</b>) GLEAM grid over the Qaretikan basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Monthly volume of the general water balance components.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The structure of the hierarchical decision tree.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop