impact of soil texture on simulated hydrology in orchidee ...jun 18, 2019 · soil texture soil...
TRANSCRIPT
Salma TAFASCA (PhD student)
Supervisors: Agnès DUCHARNE and Christian VALENTIN
Impact of soil texture on simulated hydrology
in ORCHIDEE land surface model
1
CESM Land Model Working Group18 June 2019, Boulder
• Soil hydraulic properties are important in hydrological and land surface models (LSMs)
• There is no global coverage of measured soil hydraulicproperties
• Pedotransfer functions derive soil hydraulic properties fromavailable soil data e.g. soil texture.
Introduction
2
Soil texture: relative proportion of sand, silt and clay
What is soil texture?
3
2 µm 50 µm 2000 µm
Clay Silt Sand
Soil texture: relative proportion of sand, silt and clay
What is soil texture?
12 USDA soil textures
% Sand
4
2 µm 50 µm 2000 µm
Clay Silt Sand
Soil texture: relative proportion of sand, silt and clay
2 µm 50 µm 2000 µm
Clay Silt Sand
Soil texture class
Median diameter (µm)
What is soil texture?
12 USDA soil textures
% Sand
5
How does soil texture impact simulated hydrology in a LSM?
Soil texture: relative proportion of sand, silt and clay
2 µm 50 µm 2000 µm
Clay Silt Sand
Soil texture class
Median diameter (µm)12 USDA soil textures
% Sand
What is soil texture?
6
7
• State-of-the-art land surface model• Developed by the Institute Pierre Simon Laplace (Paris)• Simulates water, energy and carbon fluxes
The land surface model ORCHIDEE
• Multi-layer scheme (11 layers)
• Physically based description of soil water fluxes: Richards equation
• Soil thickness: 2m
• Free drainage at the bottom
Rsurf
D
PSoil EvapTransp.
Soil hydrology in ORCHIDEE LSM
8
• Multi-layer scheme (11 layers)
• Physically based description of soil water fluxes: Richards equation
• Soil thickness: 2m
• Free drainage at the bottom
Rsurf
D
PSoil EvapTransp.
Requires K(θ) and D(θ) curves:From Van Genuchten equations
Soil hydrodynamic parameters(porosity, Ks, ts…..)
Soil texture
Soil hydrology in ORCHIDEE LSM
9
• Multi-layer scheme (11 layers)
• Physically based description of soil water fluxes: Richards equation
• Soil thickness: 2m
• Free drainage at the bottom
Rsurf
D
PSoil EvapTransp.
Requires K(θ) and D(θ) curves:From Van Genuchten equations
Soil hydrodynamic parameters(porosity, Ks, ts…..)
Soil texture
Soil hydrology in ORCHIDEE LSM
K(θ) D(θ)
10
Soil texture map Derived soil parameter map
Pedotransfer functions
Reynolds et al. (2000)
Deriving soil parameters in ORCHIDEE LSM
11
Soil texture map Derived soil parameter map
Pedotransfer functions
Look-up table ofCarsel and Parrish (1988)
Deriving soil parameters in ORCHIDEE LSM
Reynolds et al. (2000)
12
Offline ORCHIDEE simulations
0.5° resolution
Period: 1980-2010
Different soil maps and atmospheric forcings
Soil Map Atmospheric forcing Texture distrib.
Reynolds CRU-NCEP
Reynolds GSWP3
Zobler GSWP3
SoilGrids GSWP3
Uniform Loam GSWP3
Uniform Loamy Sand GSWP3
Uniform Silt GSWP3
Uniform Clay GSWP3
Numerical experiments
13
Soil Map Atmospheric forcing Texture distrib.
Reynolds CRU-NCEP
Reynolds GSWP3
Zobler GSWP3
SoilGrids GSWP3
Uniform Loam GSWP3
Uniform Loamy Sand GSWP3
Uniform Silt GSWP3
Uniform Clay GSWP3
Numerical experiments
14
Reynolds et al. (2000) Zobler (1987) SoilGrids (Hengl et al., 2014)
Offline ORCHIDEE simulations
0.5° resolution
Period: 1980-2010
Different soil maps and atmospheric forcings
Soil Map Atmospheric forcing Texture distrib.
Reynolds CRU-NCEP
Reynolds GSWP3
Zobler GSWP3
SoilGrids GSWP3
Uniform Loam GSWP3
Uniform Loamy Sand GSWP3
Uniform Silt GSWP3
Uniform Clay GSWP3
Numerical experiments
15
Offline ORCHIDEE simulations
0.5° resolution
Period: 1980-2010
Different soil maps and atmospheric forcings
Soil Map Atmospheric forcing Texture distrib.
Reynolds CRU-NCEP
Reynolds GSWP3
Zobler GSWP3
SoilGrids GSWP3
Uniform Loam GSWP3
Uniform Loamy Sand GSWP3
Uniform Silt GSWP3
Uniform Clay GSWP3
Numerical experiments
16
Grid point scale response of ORCHIDEE to different soil textures
Soil Map Atmospheric forcing Texture distrib.
Reynolds GSWP3
17
Grid point scale response of ORCHIDEE to different soil textures
18
Global scale response of ORCHIDEE to different soil maps
19
Different realistic soil mapsSimilar climate forcing
Global scale response of ORCHIDEE to different soil maps
• Similar water budgets for different soil maps.
20
Contrasted uniform soil mapsSimilar climate forcing
Global scale response of ORCHIDEE to different soil maps
• Similar water budgets for different soil maps.
21
Global scale response of ORCHIDEE to different soil maps
• Similar water budgets for different soil maps.
• Climate forcing impacts more than soil texture.
Similar soil mapDifferent climate forcing
22
Estimated total runoff(Rodell et al., 2015)
Estimated ET (Rodell et al., 2015; Jung et al., 2010; Miralles et al., 2011)
• Similar water budgets for different soil maps.
• Climate forcing impacts more than soil texture.
• Differences in water budget smaller thanuncertainty in observations.
Global scale response of ORCHIDEE to different soil maps
23
• Similar spatial patterns with Reynolds map and uniform Loam map.
Evapotranspiration (mm/d)
Spatial distribution of simulated water fluxes
Reynolds map Reynolds map
Uniform Loamy map Uniform Loamy map
24
• Similar spatial patterns with Reynolds map and uniform Loam map.
• Higher spatial sensitivity of surface runoff to soil maps.
Evapotranspiration (mm/d) Surface runoff (mm/d)
Spatial distribution of simulated water fluxes
Reynolds map Reynolds map
Uniform Loamy map Uniform Loamy map
25
Sensitivity of evapotranspiration spatial patterns
Reynolds - Zobler
Grey areas: differences not statisticallysignificant (student t-test, α=5%)
Differences of ET (mm/d)
GSWP3 – CRU-NCEP
SoilGrids – Uniform loam Reynolds – Obs (GLEAM)
26
Sensitivity of evapotranspiration spatial patterns
Reynolds - Zobler
Grey areas: differences not statisticallysignificant (student t-test, α=5%)
GSWP3 – CRU-NCEP
SoilGrids – Uniform loam Reynolds – Obs (GLEAM)
Change of soil map
27
Sensitivity of evapotranspiration spatial patterns
Reynolds - Zobler
Grey areas: differences not statisticallysignificant (student t-test, α=5%)
GSWP3 – CRU-NCEP
SoilGrids – Uniform loam Reynolds – Obs (GLEAM)
Change of climate forcing
28
Sensitivity of evapotranspiration spatial patterns
Reynolds - Zobler
Grey areas: differences not statisticallysignificant (student t-test, α=5%)
GSWP3 – CRU-NCEP
SoilGrids – Uniform loam Reynolds – Obs (GLEAM)
Evapotranspiration bias
29
Conclusion and perspectives
• Small scale: realistic sensitivity of ORCHIDEE to soil texture
• Global scale: weak sensitivity of simulated water budget to soil texture maps
compared to other forcings (climate, vegetation …)
• Why?
• Maps of dominant soil texture at 0.5° favoring loam (over 40% overlap)
• Common input soil data (FAO/UNESCO soil map of the world)
• What next?
• Sub-grid variability of soil properties
• Other soil components: organic matter, soil structure
30