Comparative Analysis of Snowfall Accumulation and Gauge Undercatch Correction Factors from Diverse Data Sets: In Situ, Satellite, and Reanalysis
Name:
panahi-behrangi_paper-revised- ...
Size:
1.824Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Accepted Manuscript
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Dept Hydrol & Atmospher SciUniv Arizona, Dept Geosci
Issue Date
2019-12-13
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
KOREAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCCitation
Panahi, M., Behrangi, A. Comparative Analysis of Snowfall Accumulation and Gauge Undercatch Correction Factors from Diverse Data Sets: In Situ, Satellite, and Reanalysis. Asia-Pacific J Atmos Sci (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13143-019-00161-6Rights
© Korean Meteorological Society and Springer Nature B.V. 2019.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Despite its importance for hydrology and water resources, accurate estimation of snowfall rate over snow-covered regions has remained a major observational challenge from both in-situ and remote sensing instruments. Snowfall accumulation can be measured by either accumulating snowfall estimates or measuring snowpack properties such as Snow Water Equivalent (SWE) and mass. By focusing on snowfall over snow accumulation period and using case studies and long-term average (2003 to 2015) over CONUS, this study compares snowfall accumulation from gauge stations (using GPCC and PRISM products), satellite products (GPCP and the suite of IMERG products), and reanalysis (ERA-interim, ERA5, and MERRA-2). Changes in SWE based on the recent UA-SWE product together with mass change observation from GRACE were used for assessment of precipitation products. We also investigated two popular gauge undercatch correction factors (CFs) used to mitigate precipitation undercatch in GPCC and GPCP. The results show that snow accumulation from most of the products is bounded by GPCC with and without correction, highlighting the critical importance of selecting proper CFs for gauge-undercatch correction. The CF based on Legates and Willmott method was found to be more consistent with the SWE-based analysis than CF based on the Fuchs method. Reanalysis show very similar spatial pattern among themselves, but represent large variation in simulating snow accumulation, with ERA-interim showing the least accumulation and MERRA-2 showing the highest accumulation and closest to the snow accumulation suggested by SWE.Note
12 month embargo; published online: 13 December 2019ISSN
1976-7633EISSN
1976-7951Version
Final accepted manuscriptae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1007/s13143-019-00161-6