Tundra water budget and implications of precipitation underestimation
[1];
[3];
[5]
- Water and Environmental Research Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks Alaska USA
- International Arctic Research Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks Alaska USA
- Department of Biology, San Diego State University, San Diego California USA, Department of Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter UK
- Department of Biological and the Environmental Science and Engineering Program, University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso Texas USA
- Department of Biology, San Diego State University, San Diego California USA, Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield UK
Difficulties in obtaining accurate precipitation measurements have limited meaningful hydrologic assessment for over a century due to performance challenges of conventional snowfall and rainfall gauges in windy environments. Here, we compare snowfall observations and bias adjusted snowfall to end-of-winter snow accumulation measurements on the ground for 16 years (1999-2014) and assess the implication of precipitation underestimation on the water balance for a low-gradient tundra wetland near Utqiagvik (formerly Barrow), Alaska (2007-2009). In agreement with other studies, and not accounting for sublimation, conventional snowfall gauges captured 23-56% of end-of-winter snow accumulation. Once snowfall and rainfall are bias adjusted, long-term annual precipitation estimates more than double (from 123 to 274 mm), highlighting the risk of studies using conventional or unadjusted precipitation that dramatically under-represent water balance components. Applying conventional precipitation information to the water balance analysis produced consistent storage deficits (79 to 152 mm) that were all larger than the largest actual deficit (75 mm), which was observed in the unusually low rainfall summer of 2007. Year-to-year variability in adjusted rainfall (±33 mm) was larger than evapotranspiration (±13 mm). Measured interannual variability in partitioning of snow into runoff (29% in 2008 to 68% in 2009) in years with similar end-of-winter snow accumulation (180 and 164 mm, respectively) highlights the importance of the previous summer's rainfall (25 and 60 mm, respectively) on spring runoff production. Incorrect representation of precipitation can therefore have major implications for Arctic water budget descriptions that in turn can alter estimates of carbon and energy fluxes.
- Research Organization:
- San Diego State University, San Diego, CA (United States)
- Sponsoring Organization:
- USDOE Office of Science (SC); National Science Foundation (NSF); Swedish-America Foundation; Gemzeus Foundation; Carbon in Arctic Reservoirs Vulnerability Experiment (CARVE); National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
- Grant/Contract Number:
- SC0005160; OPP-03332964; OPP-0328686; OPP-0436177; PLR0454996; PLR-0421588; PLR-1304555
- OSTI ID:
- 1373979
- Alternate ID(s):
- OSTI ID: 1373980; OSTI ID: 1623450
- Journal Information:
- Water Resources Research, Journal Name: Water Resources Research; ISSN 0043-1397
- Publisher:
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)Copyright Statement
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Web of Science
Similar Records
Hydrologic Model Files (PRMS) for Historical Conditions in the East River Watershed, Colorado between 1987-2019
200-BP-1 Prototype Hanford Barrier - 15 Years of Performance Monitoring