One‐dimensional statistical dynamic representation of subgrid spatial variability of precipitation in the two‐layer variable infiltration capacity model

TLDR

The study extends the two‑layer VIC‑2L model by adding a one‑dimensional statistical dynamic representation of subgrid precipitation variability. Using this analytical approach, the model explicitly captures how subgrid precipitation, infiltration, and vegetation variability influence surface fluxes, runoff, and soil moisture, and the results are compared to pixel‑based and uniform‑precipitation simulations. Results show that precipitation coverage dominates the estimation of surface fluxes, runoff, and soil moisture, while the spatial distribution within the covered area has a secondary effect; the analytical method closely matches pixel‑based results and outperforms uniform precipitation, though differences are modest.

Abstract

The two‐layer variable infiltration capacity (VIC‐2L) model is extended to incorporate a representation of subgrid variability in precipitation, using an analytical one‐dimensional statistical dynamic representation for partial area coverage of precipitation. The analytical approach allows the effects of subgrid‐scale spatial variability of precipitation on surface fluxes, runoff production, and soil moisture to be represented explicitly. With this method, spatially integrated representations of surface fluxes, runoff, and soil moisture due to subgrid‐scale spatial variability in precipitation, infiltration, and vegetation cover are obtained. The results are compared with those obtained using an exhaustive pixel‐based approach, and the results obtained by applying uniform precipitation over the precipitation‐covered area. The precipitation coverage over a grid cell is shown to play a primary role in estimating the surface fluxes, runoff, and soil moisture. In general, the spatial distribution of precipitation within the precipitation‐covered area plays a secondary role, in part because VIC‐2L represents the subgrid spatial variability of soil properties. While the analytical approach gives good approximations to the pixel‐based approach, and is superior to the uniform precipitation approach in general, the differences are not large.