Checking for non-preferred file/folder path names (may take a long time depending on the number of files/folders) ...

Supporting Data and Code for "Evaluating the U.S. National Water Model Retrospective Evapotranspiration Simulation using Eddy-Covariance Flux Tower Measurements"


Authors:
Owners: This resource does not have an owner who is an active HydroShare user. Contact CUAHSI (help@cuahsi.org) for information on this resource.
Type: Resource
Storage: The size of this resource is 190.4 MB
Created: Aug 09, 2024 at 8:12 a.m. (UTC)
Last updated: Oct 09, 2025 at 6:25 p.m. (UTC)
Published date: Oct 09, 2025 at 6:25 p.m. (UTC)
DOI: 10.4211/hs.47168b0fcecb4e04ae70329cd5c2b4ec
Citation: See how to cite this resource
Sharing Status: Published
Views: 1275
Downloads: 4
+1 Votes: Be the first one to 
 this.
Comments: No comments (yet)

Abstract

This HydroShare resource contains the data, Python scripts, and documentation used in the study “Evaluating the U.S. National Water Model Retrospective Evapotranspiration Simulation using Eddy-Covariance Flux Tower Measurements” (Chapagain et al., 2025, Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies).The study evaluates National Water Model (NWM) evapotranspiration (ET) estimates across the contiguous United States (CONUS) using multi-year comparisons with AmeriFlux tower observations at 72 sites spanning diverse hydroclimatic settings.

The analysis assesses NWM ET performance at the site level and across categorical groupings based on National Weather Service River Forecast Centers (RFCs), Köppen–Geiger climate zones, and land cover types. It also examines temperature forcing accuracy and contrasts ET behavior under water- and energy-limited (P/PET) regimes.

Results reveal wide performance variability, with stronger agreement in cold climates and forested basins and lower skill in arid and agricultural regions. ET estimates tend to perform better under water-limited than energy-limited conditions, while temperature forcings show strong agreement with observations.

The resource includes:

- Preprocessed NWM and AmeriFlux ET and meteorological datasets.
- Python scripts for computing performance metrics (e.g., Scaled KGE, PBIAS).
- Group-based and regime-based analysis notebooks.
- Visualization workflows reproducing key figures from the paper.
- ArcGIS files for site-location mapping.

Most analyses were performed in Python, with ArcGIS Pro was used for spatial processing and visualization. These materials enable reproducibility of the paper’s results and facilitate further analysis of NWM ET performance across CONUS.

Subject Keywords

Coverage

Spatial

Coordinate System/Geographic Projection:
WGS 84 EPSG:4326
Coordinate Units:
Decimal degrees
North Latitude
49.6978°
East Longitude
-65.8301°
South Latitude
24.4896°
West Longitude
-126.2988°

Content

Readme.md

README – ET Evaluation HydroShare Resource

This repository supports the study:
“Evaluating the U.S. National Water Model Retrospective Evapotranspiration Simulation using Eddy-Covariance Flux Tower Measurements”
by Chapagain, Maghami, and Ames (2025).


Getting Started

Before running the notebooks, please unzip both archives into the same working directory:

  • Notebooks_and_Data.zip – contains all Jupyter notebooks (JN1–JN5) and their input/output subdirectories.
  • Figure1.zip – contains the ArcGIS Pro project and layer files used to create the site-location map (Figure 1).

Once unzipped, open and execute the notebooks sequentially (JN1JN5) to reproduce the results, figures, and tables presented in the paper.


Folder Structure and Workflow

1. Notebooks_and_Data.zip

Contains all analysis and visualization notebooks (JN1–JN5) and their associated data folders.

JN1_Input

Contains the primary input datasets and preprocessing outputs.

Preprocessing Overview

This study involved two main preprocessing stages prior to analysis.

(1) ET Preprocessing (NWM + AmeriFlux)
- Downloaded and aggregated NWM evapotranspiration (ET) data.
- Processed AmeriFlux latent heat flux (LE) data to compute monthly ET.
- Integrated site metadata (RFC, Köppen–Geiger climate zone, land use, and elevation).
- Generated a combined dataset of monthly ET from both NWM and tower observations across 72 sites.
- Note: Raw AmeriFlux and NWM data, along with intermediate scripts, are not included due to size and access constraints.
- The summarized file Monthly_NWM_Tower_ET_Siteinfo.csv serves as the starting point for all subsequent analyses.
- Refer to the published paper for additional details on preprocessing and data sources.

(2) PET and P/PET Ratio Preprocessing
- Calculates the precipitation-to-potential evapotranspiration ratio (P/PET) used to classify each site-month as water-limited or energy-limited.
- Corresponding scripts and derived data are included inside
JN1_Input/PET_and_P_PET_ratio_Preprocess/.
- Outputs are used in downstream notebooks (e.g., JN5) for regime-based ET performance evaluation.


JN4_Input

Contains merged temperature and ET datasets from NWM (AORC forcing) and AmeriFlux, used in JN4 to evaluate temperature bias and its relationship with ET performance.


Output Folders

Each notebook (JN1 through JN5) automatically generates its own output directory (e.g., JN2_Output, JN3_Output, etc.) upon execution.
These folders store all intermediate results, metrics, and figures, ensuring full reproducibility without manual setup.


Analysis and Visualization

  • JN1 – Integrates NWM and AmeriFlux ET data, computes P/PET ratios, and prepares summarized input files.
  • JN2 – Computes site-level ET performance metrics (Scaled KGE, R², RMSE, PBIAS).
  • JN3 – Visualizes and ranks ET performance across sites, RFCs, and climate zones.
  • JN4 – Evaluates AORC temperature forcing accuracy and examines its relationship with ET biases.
  • JN5 – Analyzes and visualizes water-limited vs. energy-limited ET performance using P/PET-based regime classification.

2. Figure1.zip

Contains the ArcGIS Pro project and layer files used to create Figure 1 of the paper.
The map displays all 72 AmeriFlux tower sites, color-coded by RFC, land use, and Köppen–Geiger climate zone.
Clustered site symbols are offset slightly for clarity.
ArcGIS Pro was used for both spatial attribute assignment (e.g., RFC, climate, land use, elevation) and visualization.


Notes

  • Most notebooks (JN1–JN5) run locally in Python using standard scientific libraries such as pandas, numpy, and matplotlib.
  • ArcGIS Pro was used only to generate the site-location and hydroclimatic maps included in Figure 1.
  • All analytical results, figures, and tables in the manuscript can be reproduced using the provided Jupyter notebooks and summarized input files.

Related Resources

This resource is referenced by Chapagain, A. R., Maghami, I., & Ames, D. P. (2025). Evaluating the U.S. National Water Model Retrospective Evapotranspiration Simulation using Eddy-Covariance Flux Tower Measurements. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies (in press)

Credits

Funding Agencies

This resource was created using funding from the following sources:
Agency Name Award Title Award Number
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Cooperative Institute for Research to Operations in Hydrology (CIROH) NA22NWS4320003

How to Cite

Chapagain, A. R., I. Maghami, D. Ames (2025). Supporting Data and Code for "Evaluating the U.S. National Water Model Retrospective Evapotranspiration Simulation using Eddy-Covariance Flux Tower Measurements", HydroShare, https://doi.org/10.4211/hs.47168b0fcecb4e04ae70329cd5c2b4ec

This resource is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
CC-BY

Comments

There are currently no comments

New Comment

required