Морской гидрофизический журнал. 2021; 37: 490-504
Верификация данных дистанционного зондирования GPM IMERG и количественные оценки атмосферных осадков в Крымском регионе в теплое время года
https://doi.org/10.22449/0233-7584-2021-4-490-504Аннотация
Цель. Цель работы состоит в оценке качества данных дистанционного зондирования Integrated MultisatellitE Retrievals from GPM (IMERG) на основе архива наблюдений теплых периодов 2006–2018 гг. и получении количественных оценок параметров атмосферных осадков для территории Крымского региона.
Методы и результаты. Оценка качества данных IMERG выполнялась на основе верификации с данными наземной наблюдательной сети Росгидромета, рассматриваемыми в процедуре сопоставления в качестве заведомо более достоверных. Приводятся многолетние статистические характеристики количества, частоты и интенсивности атмосферных осадков для разных климатических зон Крымского полуострова. Рассмотрены пространственная изменчивость летних осадков, коэффициенты временной корреляции и смещение IMERG относительно данных наземных наблюдений.
Выводы. Массив IMERG характеризуется более слабой пространственной изменчивостью по сравнению с данными наземных наблюдений. Абсолютная погрешность летних сумм осадков невелика для центральной и горной частей Крыма, в то время как осадки на береговых пунктах существенно завышены. Завышение сумм осадков в IMERG является в основном следствием их завышенной повторяемости. Временная изменчивость осадков IMERG хорошо соответствует данным наблюдений со средним коэффициентом корреляции 0,73. По большинству из рассмотренных метрик в центральных и горных частях Крыма в теплый период IMERG существенно превосходит альтернативные массивы данных осадков и с определенными ограничениями может быть использован для практических задач. В то же время отсутствие калибровки над морской акваторией приводит к сниженному качеству оценок осадков по IMERG в прибрежных областях.
Список литературы
1. Future global meteorological drought hot spots: A study based on CORDEX Data / J. Spinoni [et al.] // Journal of Climate. 2020. Vol. 33, no. 9. P. 3635–3661. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0084.1
2. The soil moisture active passive (SMAP) mission / D. Entekhabi [et al.] // Proceedings of the IEEE. 2010. Vol. 98, no. 5. P. 704–716. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2010.2043918
3. Maggioni V., Massari C. On the performance of satellite precipitation products in riverine flood modeling: A review // Journal of Hydrology. 2018. Vol. 558. P. 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.01.039
4. The Global Precipitation Measurement Mission / A. Y. Hou [et al.] // Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 2014. V. 95, no. 5. P. 701–722. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMSD-13-00164.1
5. Assessment of IMERG precipitation estimates over Europe / A. Navarro [et al.] // Remote Sensing. 2019. Vol. 11, no. 21. P. 2470. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11212470
6. The contribution of rain gauges in the calibration of the IMERG product: Results from the first validation over Spain / F. J. Tapiador [et al.] // Journal of Hydrometeorology. 2020. Vol. 21, no. 2. P. 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-19-0116.1
7. First-year evaluation of GPM rainfall over the Netherlands: IMERG day 1 final run (V03D) / M. R. Gaona Rios [et al.] // Journal of Hydrometeorology. 2016. Vol. 17, no. 11. P. 2799– 2814. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-16-0087.1
8. Early assessment of integrated multi-satellite retrievals for global precipitation measurement over China / H. Guo [et al.] // Atmospheric Research. 2016. Vol. 176. P. 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2016.02.020
9. Wang H., Yong B. Quasi-Global evaluation of IMERG and GSMaP precipitation products over land using gauge observations // Water. 2020. Vol. 12, no. 1. P. 243. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12010243
10. Гавриков А. В. Оценка качества воспроизведения осадков над Северной Атлантикой и влияния гидростатической аппроксимации в атмосферной модели WRF-ARW // Океанология. 2017. Т. 57, № 2. С. 261–267. https://doi.org/10.7868/S0030157417020046
11. Representation of precipitation characteristics and extremes in regional reanalyses and satellite- and gauge-based estimates over western and central Europe / M. Lockhoff [et al.] // Journal of Hydrometeorology. 2019. Vol. 20, no. 6. P. 1123–1145. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHMD-18-0200.1
12. Koistinen J., Saltikoff E. Experience of customer products of accumulated snow, sleet and rain // COST 75 Advanced Weather Radar Systems, International Seminar, Locarno, Switzerland, 23–27 March 1998 / Ed. C.G. Collier. – Luxembourg: European Commission, 1998. P. 397–406.
13. Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document (ATBD) Version 06. NASA Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (IMERG) / G. J. Huffman [et al.]. NASA, 2020. 35 p. URL: https://gpm.nasa.gov/resources/documents/algorithminformation/IMERG-V06-ATBD (date of access: 14.09.2020).
14. IMERG V06: Changes to the morphing algorithm / J. Tan [et al.] // Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 2019. Vol. 36, iss. 12. P. 2471–2482. https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-19-0114.1
15. GPCC's new land surface precipitation climatology based on quality-controlled in situ data and its role in quantifying the global water cycle / U. Schneider [et al.] // Theoretical and Applied Climatology. 2014. Vol. 115. P. 15–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-013-0860-x
16. An ensemble version of the E‐OBS temperature and precipitation data sets / R. G. Cornes [et al.] // Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. 2018. Vol. 123, no. 17. P. 9391–9409. https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD028200
17. Regional climate modeling on European scales: a joint standard evaluation of the EUROCORDEX RCM ensemble / S. Kotlarski [et al.] // Geoscientific Model Development. 2014. Vol. 7. P. 1297–1333. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-1297-2014
18. Алешина М. А., Семенов В. А., Чернокульский А. В. Исследование роли глобальных и региональных факторов в изменении экстремальности летних осадков на Черноморском побережье Кавказа с использованием результатов экспериментов с моделью климата // Фундаментальная и прикладная климатология. 2019. Т. 3. С. 59–75. https://doi.org/10.21513/2410-8758-2019-3-59-75
19. Evaluation of gridded meteorological datasets for hydrological modeling / M. Raimonet [et al.] // Journal of Hydrometeorology. 2017. Vol. 18, no. 11. P. 3027–3041. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-17-0018.1
20. Testing the hydrological coherence of high‐resolution gridded precipitation and temperature data sets / L. Laiti [et al.] // Water Resources Research. 2018. Vol. 54, no. 3. P. 1999–2016. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021633
21. How reliable are satellite precipitation estimates for driving hydrological models: A verification study over the Mediterranean area / S. Camici [et al.] // Journal of Hydrology. 2018. Vol. 563. P. 950–961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.06.067
22. Климатический атлас Крыма. Симферополь : Таврия-Плюс, 2000. 118 с.
23. Клiмат України. Киев : Изд-во Раевского, 2003. 343 с.
24. Ефимов В. В., Комаровская О. И. Бризовая циркуляция в атмосфере Крымского региона // Морской гидрофизический журнал. 2015. № 6. С. 77–87. https://doi.org/10.22449/0233-7584-2015-6-77-87
25. Ефимов В. В. Численное моделирование бризовой циркуляции над Крымским полуостровом // Известия Российской академии наук. Физика атмосферы и океана. 2017. Т. 53, № 1. С. 95–106. https://doi.org/10.7868/S0002351517010047
26. How accurate are satellite estimates of precipitation over the north Indian Ocean? // S. Prakash [et al.] / Theoretical and Applied Climatology. 2018. Vol. 134. P. 467–475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-017-2287-2
27. Дунаева Е. А., Коваленко П. И. Типизация бассейнов рек Крыма по агроландшафтам и экологической нагрузке на них // Научный журнал Российского НИИ проблем мелиорации. 2013. Т. 12, № 4. С. 157–167.
28. How does the evaluation of the GPM IMERG rainfall product depend on gauge density and rainfall intensity? / F. Tian [et al.] // Journal of Hydrometeorology. 2018. Vol. 19, iss. 2. P. 339–349. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-17-0161.1
Morskoy Gidrofizicheskiy Zhurnal. 2021; 37: 490-504
Evaluation of GPM IMERG Products and Estimation of Warm-Season Precipitation in Crimea
https://doi.org/10.22449/0233-7584-2021-4-490-504Abstract
Purpose. The study was aimed at the evaluation of the Integrated MultisatellitE Retrievals from GPM (IMERG) remote sensing dataset using ground observations and estimation of the 2006–2018 warmseason precipitation in the Crimean Peninsula.
Methods and Results. Evaluation of the IMERG dataset was performed using the meteorological station observations treated as the ground truth. We provided the multiyear statistical characteristics of precipitation amounts, frequency and intensity for different climate zones of the Crimean Peninsula. We considered the spatial variability of summer precipitation, bias and correlation between IMERG and the ground observations.
Conclusions. IMERG has a weaker spatial variability compared to the ground observations. The warm-season IMERG bias is small in the central and mountainous parts of Crimea, whereas the precipitation estimates in the coastal zones are substantially overestimated. The IMERG wet bias is mostly caused by the excessive rainfall frequency. The temporal variability of IMERG is in good agreement with the observations with an average correlation coefficient 0.73. For most of the metrics considered, warm-season IMERG precipitation significantly outperforms the other datasets in the central and mountainous parts of Crimea and could be used for practical tasks with certain precautions. At the same time, due to the lack of calibration over the marine areas, the quality of IMERG precipitation estimates in the coastal zones is reduced.
References
1. Future global meteorological drought hot spots: A study based on CORDEX Data / J. Spinoni [et al.] // Journal of Climate. 2020. Vol. 33, no. 9. P. 3635–3661. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-19-0084.1
2. The soil moisture active passive (SMAP) mission / D. Entekhabi [et al.] // Proceedings of the IEEE. 2010. Vol. 98, no. 5. P. 704–716. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2010.2043918
3. Maggioni V., Massari C. On the performance of satellite precipitation products in riverine flood modeling: A review // Journal of Hydrology. 2018. Vol. 558. P. 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.01.039
4. The Global Precipitation Measurement Mission / A. Y. Hou [et al.] // Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 2014. V. 95, no. 5. P. 701–722. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMSD-13-00164.1
5. Assessment of IMERG precipitation estimates over Europe / A. Navarro [et al.] // Remote Sensing. 2019. Vol. 11, no. 21. P. 2470. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11212470
6. The contribution of rain gauges in the calibration of the IMERG product: Results from the first validation over Spain / F. J. Tapiador [et al.] // Journal of Hydrometeorology. 2020. Vol. 21, no. 2. P. 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-19-0116.1
7. First-year evaluation of GPM rainfall over the Netherlands: IMERG day 1 final run (V03D) / M. R. Gaona Rios [et al.] // Journal of Hydrometeorology. 2016. Vol. 17, no. 11. P. 2799– 2814. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-16-0087.1
8. Early assessment of integrated multi-satellite retrievals for global precipitation measurement over China / H. Guo [et al.] // Atmospheric Research. 2016. Vol. 176. P. 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2016.02.020
9. Wang H., Yong B. Quasi-Global evaluation of IMERG and GSMaP precipitation products over land using gauge observations // Water. 2020. Vol. 12, no. 1. P. 243. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12010243
10. Gavrikov A. V. Otsenka kachestva vosproizvedeniya osadkov nad Severnoi Atlantikoi i vliyaniya gidrostaticheskoi approksimatsii v atmosfernoi modeli WRF-ARW // Okeanologiya. 2017. T. 57, № 2. S. 261–267. https://doi.org/10.7868/S0030157417020046
11. Representation of precipitation characteristics and extremes in regional reanalyses and satellite- and gauge-based estimates over western and central Europe / M. Lockhoff [et al.] // Journal of Hydrometeorology. 2019. Vol. 20, no. 6. P. 1123–1145. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHMD-18-0200.1
12. Koistinen J., Saltikoff E. Experience of customer products of accumulated snow, sleet and rain // COST 75 Advanced Weather Radar Systems, International Seminar, Locarno, Switzerland, 23–27 March 1998 / Ed. C.G. Collier. – Luxembourg: European Commission, 1998. P. 397–406.
13. Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document (ATBD) Version 06. NASA Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (IMERG) / G. J. Huffman [et al.]. NASA, 2020. 35 p. URL: https://gpm.nasa.gov/resources/documents/algorithminformation/IMERG-V06-ATBD (date of access: 14.09.2020).
14. IMERG V06: Changes to the morphing algorithm / J. Tan [et al.] // Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 2019. Vol. 36, iss. 12. P. 2471–2482. https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-19-0114.1
15. GPCC's new land surface precipitation climatology based on quality-controlled in situ data and its role in quantifying the global water cycle / U. Schneider [et al.] // Theoretical and Applied Climatology. 2014. Vol. 115. P. 15–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-013-0860-x
16. An ensemble version of the E‐OBS temperature and precipitation data sets / R. G. Cornes [et al.] // Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. 2018. Vol. 123, no. 17. P. 9391–9409. https://doi.org/10.1029/2017JD028200
17. Regional climate modeling on European scales: a joint standard evaluation of the EUROCORDEX RCM ensemble / S. Kotlarski [et al.] // Geoscientific Model Development. 2014. Vol. 7. P. 1297–1333. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-1297-2014
18. Aleshina M. A., Semenov V. A., Chernokul'skii A. V. Issledovanie roli global'nykh i regional'nykh faktorov v izmenenii ekstremal'nosti letnikh osadkov na Chernomorskom poberezh'e Kavkaza s ispol'zovaniem rezul'tatov eksperimentov s model'yu klimata // Fundamental'naya i prikladnaya klimatologiya. 2019. T. 3. S. 59–75. https://doi.org/10.21513/2410-8758-2019-3-59-75
19. Evaluation of gridded meteorological datasets for hydrological modeling / M. Raimonet [et al.] // Journal of Hydrometeorology. 2017. Vol. 18, no. 11. P. 3027–3041. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-17-0018.1
20. Testing the hydrological coherence of high‐resolution gridded precipitation and temperature data sets / L. Laiti [et al.] // Water Resources Research. 2018. Vol. 54, no. 3. P. 1999–2016. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021633
21. How reliable are satellite precipitation estimates for driving hydrological models: A verification study over the Mediterranean area / S. Camici [et al.] // Journal of Hydrology. 2018. Vol. 563. P. 950–961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.06.067
22. Klimaticheskii atlas Kryma. Simferopol' : Tavriya-Plyus, 2000. 118 s.
23. Klimat Ukraїni. Kiev : Izd-vo Raevskogo, 2003. 343 s.
24. Efimov V. V., Komarovskaya O. I. Brizovaya tsirkulyatsiya v atmosfere Krymskogo regiona // Morskoi gidrofizicheskii zhurnal. 2015. № 6. S. 77–87. https://doi.org/10.22449/0233-7584-2015-6-77-87
25. Efimov V. V. Chislennoe modelirovanie brizovoi tsirkulyatsii nad Krymskim poluostrovom // Izvestiya Rossiiskoi akademii nauk. Fizika atmosfery i okeana. 2017. T. 53, № 1. S. 95–106. https://doi.org/10.7868/S0002351517010047
26. How accurate are satellite estimates of precipitation over the north Indian Ocean? // S. Prakash [et al.] / Theoretical and Applied Climatology. 2018. Vol. 134. P. 467–475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-017-2287-2
27. Dunaeva E. A., Kovalenko P. I. Tipizatsiya basseinov rek Kryma po agrolandshaftam i ekologicheskoi nagruzke na nikh // Nauchnyi zhurnal Rossiiskogo NII problem melioratsii. 2013. T. 12, № 4. S. 157–167.
28. How does the evaluation of the GPM IMERG rainfall product depend on gauge density and rainfall intensity? / F. Tian [et al.] // Journal of Hydrometeorology. 2018. Vol. 19, iss. 2. P. 339–349. https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-17-0161.1
