Evaluation of Statistical Methods for Estimating Missing Daily Streamflow Data

Abstract

In this study, it was aimed to investigate applicability of various statistical estimation methods for Porsuk River basin, which has sparse streamflow observations. Estimations were performed using regression, single and multiple donor stations based drainage area ratio, standardization with mean (SM), standardization with mean and standard deviation (SMS), inverse distance weighted methods. Two seperate studies were conducted for both partially missing data and completely missing data. In order to estimate streamflow statistics for use in SM and SMS methods, logarithmic regression equations were suggested. The promising results obtained from ensemble approaches will provide a significant hydrological contribution to streamflow estimations.

Keywords

• missing data,Porsuk River basin,regression,streamflow estimation

References

1. [1] Shu C. & Ouarda T. B. M. J., Improved methods for daily streamflow estimates at ungauged sites. Water Resour. Res., 48, p. W02523, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011501
2. [2] Razavi T. & Coulibaly P., An evaluation of regionalization and watershed classification schemes for continuous daily streamflow prediction in ungauged watersheds. Can. Water Resour. J., 42, pp. 2–20, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/07011784.2016.1184590
3. [3] Kalteh A. M. & Hjorth P., Imputation of missing values in precipitation-runoff process database. Hydrology Research, 40 (4), pp. 420-432, 2009. https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2009.001
4. [4] Ergen K. & Kentel E., An integrated map correlation method and multiple‐source sites drainage‐area ratio method for estimating streamflows at ungauged catchments: A case study of the Western Black Sea Region, Turkey. Journal of Environmental Management, 166, 309–320, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.10.036
5. [5] Hughes D. A. & Smakhtin V., Daily flow time series patching or extension: a spatial interpolation approach based on flow duration curves. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 41: 851–871, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626669609491555
6. [6] Tencaliec P., Favre A. C., Prieur C. & Mathevet T., Reconstruction of missing daily streamflow data using dynamic regression models. Water Resour. Res., 51 (2015), pp. 9447-9463, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017399
7. [7] Patil S. & Stieglitz M., Controls on hydrologic similarity: role of nearby gauged catchments for prediction at an ungauged catchment. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 16: 551–562, 2012. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-551-2012
8. [8] Elshorbagy A. A., Panu U. S. & Simonovic S. P., Group-based estimation of missing hydrological data: I. Approach and general methodology. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 45, 849–866, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626660009492388

9. [9] Panu U. S., Khalil M. & Elshorbagy A., Streamflow data infilling techniques based on concepts of groups and neural networks. In: Govindraju, R.S., Rao, A.R. (Eds.). Artificial Neural Networks in Hydrology. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 235-258, 2000.
10. [10] Elshorbagy A., Simonovic S. P. & Panu U. S., Estimation of missing streamflow data using principles of chaos theory. Journal of Hydrology, 255, pp. 123-133, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00513-3
11. [11] Dastorani M.T., Moghadamnia A., Piri J., & Rico-Ramirez M., Application of ANN and ANFIS models for reconstructing missing flow data. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 166: 421–434, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-009-1012-8
12. [12] Mohamoud Y. M., Prediction of daily flow duration curves and streamflow for ungauged catchments using regional flow duration curves. Hydrological Sciences, 53 (4), pp. 706-724, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1623/hysj.53.4.706
13. [13] Giustarini L., Parisot O., Ghoniem M., Hostache R., Trebs I., & Otjacques B., A user-driven case-based reasoning tool for infilling missing values in daily mean river flow records. Environmental Modelling & Software, 82, 308-320, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.04.013
14. [14] Gill M. K., Asefa T., Kaheil Y. & McKee M., Effect of missing data on performance of learning algorithms for hydrologic prediction: Implication to an imputation technique. Water Resour. Res., 43, W07416, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006WR005298
15. [15] Hirsch R. M., An evaluation of some record reconstruction techniques. Water Resour. Res., 15, 1781–1790, 1979. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR015i006p01781
16. [16] Wiche G. J., Benson R. D. & Emerson D. G., Streamflow at selected gaging stations on the James River in North Dakota and South Dakota, 1953–1982, with a section on climatology, Water Resources Investigations Report 89-4039, US Geological Survey, 99 pp, 1989.
17. [17] Emerson D. G., Vecchia A. V. & Dahl A. L., Evaluation of drainage-area ratio method used to estimate streamflow for the Red River of the North Basin, North Dakota and Minnesota. US Geological Survey Scientific Investigative Report 2005–5017, 13 pp, 2005.
18. [18] Asquith W. H., Roussel M. C. & Vrabel J., Statewide analysis of the drainage-area ratio method for 34 streamflow percentile ranges in Texas. US Geological Survey Scientific Investigative Report 2006–5286, 34 pp, 2006.
19. [19] Chen T., Ren L., Yuan F., Yang X., Jiang S., Tang T., Liu Y., Zhao C. & Zhang L., Comparison of spatial interpolation schemes for rainfall data and application in hydrological modeling. Water, 9, 342, 2017. https://doi.org/10.3390/w9050342
20. [20] Farmer W. H & Vogel R. M., Performance‐weighted methods for estimating monthly streamflow at ungauged sites. Journal of Hydrology 477: 240–250, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.11.032
21. [21] Burgess T. M. & Webster R., Optimal interpolation and isarithmic mapping of soil properties: I. The semivariogram and punctual kriging. Journal of Soil Science, 31 pp. 315-331, 1980. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.1980.tb02084.x
22. [22] DSI, Management Plan for Porsuk Watershed, Final Report, State Water Works, Ankara, 2001.
23. [23] Hortness J. E., Estimating low flow frequency statistics for unregulated streams in Idaho. US Geol. Survey. Sci. Invest. Report 2006-5035, 2006.
24. [24] Sinnott R. W., Virtues of the Haversine. Sky and Telescope, vol. 68, no. 2, p. 159, 1984.
25. [25] Nash J. E. & Sutcliffe J. V., River flow forecasting through conceptual models. Part I—A discussion of principles. Journal of Hydrology, 10 (3), 282–290, 1970. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6