Search

Remotely sensed hydrologic variables, in conjunction with streamflow data, have been increasingly used to conduct multivariable calibration of hydrologic model parameters. Here, we calibrated the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model using different combinations of streamflow and remotely sensed hydrologic variables, including Atmosphere–Land Exchange Inverse (ALEXI) Evapotranspiration (ET), Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) ET, and Soil MERGE (SMERGE) soil moisture. The results show that adding remotely sensed ET and soil moisture to the traditionally used streamflow for model calibration can impact the number and values of parameters sensitive to hydrologic modeling, but it does not necessarily improve the model performance. However, using remotely sensed ET or soil moisture data alone led to deterioration in model performance as compared with using streamflow only. In addition, we observed large discrepancies between ALEXI or MODIS ET data and the choice between these two datasets for model calibration can have significant implications for the performance of the SWAT model. The use of different combinations of streamflow, ET, and soil moisture data also resulted in noticeable differences in simulated hydrologic processes, such as runoff, percolation, and groundwater discharge. Finally, we compared the performance of SWAT and the SWAT-Carbon (SWAT-C) model under different multivariate calibration setups, and these two models exhibited pronounced differences in their performance in the validation period. Based on these results, we recommend (1) the assessment of various remotely sensed data (when multiple options available) for model calibration before choosing them for complementing the traditionally used streamflow data and (2) that different model structures be considered in the model calibration process to support robust hydrologic modeling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model has been widely used to assess the environmental impacts of growing perennial grasses for bioenergy production, its utility is limited by not explicitly accounting for shoot and root biomass development. In this study, we integrated the DAYCENT model's grass growth algorithms into SWAT (SWAT–GRASS D) and further modified it by considering the impact of leaf area index (LAI) on potential biomass production (SWAT–GRASS M). Based on testing at eight sites in the US Midwest, we found that SWAT–GRASS M generally outperformed SWAT and SWAT–GRASS D in simulating switchgrass biomass yield and the seasonal development of LAI. Additionally, SWAT–GRASS M can more realistically represent root development, which is key for the allocation of accumulated biomass and nutrients between aboveground and belowground biomass pools. These improvements are critical for credible assessment of agronomic and environmental impacts of growing perennial grasses for biomass production. • We developed the SWAT-GRASS model by integrating the grass growth module from the DAYCENT model into SWAT. • We further enhanced SWAT-GRASS to better represent the effects of LAI on biomass accumulation. • The new model achieved better simulation of switchgrass yield across multiple sites. • The new model can explicitly and reasonably represent root and shoot development of switchgrass. • A new tool for comprehensive assessment of agronomic and environmental impacts of growing switchgrass. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]