Articles | Volume 15, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-75-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-75-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
29 Jan 2024
Research article |
| 29 Jan 2024
| 29 Jan 2024
Historical and projected future runoff over the Mekong River basin
Chao Wang
School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China
Stephen Leisz
Department of Anthropology and Geography, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
College of Arts and Sciences, VinUniversity, Ocean Park, Hanoi, Vietnam
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
Xiaoying Shi
Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
Climate Change Science Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
Jiafu Mao
Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
Climate Change Science Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
Yi Zheng
School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China
Department of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
Related authors
No articles found.
James Stegen, Amy Burgin, Michelle Busch, Joshua Fisher, Joshua Ladau, Jenna Abrahamson, Lauren Kinsman-Costello, Li Li, Xingyuan Chen, Thibault Datry, Nate McDowell, Corianne Tatariw, Anna Braswell, Jillian Deines, Julia Guimond, Peter Regier, Kenton Rod, Edward Bam, Etienne Fluet-Chouinard, Inke Forbrich, Kristin Jaeger, Teri O'Meara, Tim Scheibe, Erin Seybold, Jon Sweetman, Jianqiu Zheng, Daniel Allen, Elizabeth Herndon, Beth Middleton, Scott Painter, Kevin Roche, Julianne Scamardo, Ross Vander Vorste, Kristin Boye, Ellen Wohl, Margaret Zimmer, Kelly Hondula, Maggi Laan, Anna Marshall, and Kaizad Patel
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-98, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-98, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The loss and gain of surface water (variable inundation) is a common process across Earth. Global change shifts variable inundation dynamics, highlighting a need for unified understanding that transcends individual variably inundated ecosystems (VIEs). We review literature, highlight challenges, and emphasize opportunities to generate transferable knowledge by viewing VIEs through a common lens. We aim to inspire the emergence of a cross-VIE community based on a proposed continuum approach.
Rongyun Tang, Mingzhou Jin, Jiafu Mao, Daniel M. Ricciuto, Anping Chen, and Yulong Zhang
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1525–1542, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1525-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1525-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Carbon-rich boreal peatlands are at risk of burning. The reproducibility and predictability of rare peatland fire events are investigated by constructing a two-step error-correcting machine learning framework to tackle such complex systems. Fire occurrence and impacts are highly predictable with our approach. Factor-controlling simulations revealed that temperature, moisture, and freeze–thaw cycles control boreal peatland fires, indicating thermal impacts on causing peat fires.
Kelsey T. Foster, Wu Sun, Yoichi P. Shiga, Jiafu Mao, and Anna M. Michalak
Biogeosciences, 21, 869–891, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-869-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-869-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Assessing agreement between bottom-up and top-down methods across spatial scales can provide insights into the relationship between ensemble spread (difference across models) and model accuracy (difference between model estimates and reality). We find that ensemble spread is unlikely to be a good indicator of actual uncertainty in the North American carbon balance. However, models that are consistent with atmospheric constraints show stronger agreement between top-down and bottom-up estimates.
Gary Sterle, Julia Perdrial, Dustin W. Kincaid, Kristen L. Underwood, Donna M. Rizzo, Ijaz Ul Haq, Li Li, Byung Suk Lee, Thomas Adler, Hang Wen, Helena Middleton, and Adrian A. Harpold
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 611–630, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-611-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-611-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We develop stream water chemistry to pair with the existing CAMELS (Catchment Attributes and Meteorology for Large-sample Studies) dataset. The newly developed dataset, termed CAMELS-Chem, includes common stream water chemistry constituents and wet deposition chemistry in 516 catchments. Examples show the value of CAMELS-Chem to trend and spatial analyses, as well as its limitations in sampling length and consistency.
Wei Zhi, Yuning Shi, Hang Wen, Leila Saberi, Gene-Hua Crystal Ng, Kayalvizhi Sadayappan, Devon Kerins, Bryn Stewart, and Li Li
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 315–333, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-315-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-315-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Watersheds are the fundamental Earth surface functioning unit that connects the land to aquatic systems. Here we present the recently developed BioRT-Flux-PIHM v1.0, a watershed-scale biogeochemical reactive transport model, to improve our ability to understand and predict solute export and water quality. The model has been verified against the benchmark code CrunchTope and has recently been applied to understand reactive transport processes in multiple watersheds of different conditions.
Yaoping Wang, Jiafu Mao, Mingzhou Jin, Forrest M. Hoffman, Xiaoying Shi, Stan D. Wullschleger, and Yongjiu Dai
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4385–4405, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4385-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4385-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We developed seven global soil moisture datasets (1970–2016, monthly, half-degree, and multilayer) by merging a wide range of data sources, including in situ and satellite observations, reanalysis, offline land surface model simulations, and Earth system model simulations. Given the great value of long-term, multilayer, gap-free soil moisture products to climate research and applications, we believe this paper and the presented datasets would be of interest to many different communities.
Claudia Tebaldi, Kevin Debeire, Veronika Eyring, Erich Fischer, John Fyfe, Pierre Friedlingstein, Reto Knutti, Jason Lowe, Brian O'Neill, Benjamin Sanderson, Detlef van Vuuren, Keywan Riahi, Malte Meinshausen, Zebedee Nicholls, Katarzyna B. Tokarska, George Hurtt, Elmar Kriegler, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Gerald Meehl, Richard Moss, Susanne E. Bauer, Olivier Boucher, Victor Brovkin, Young-Hwa Byun, Martin Dix, Silvio Gualdi, Huan Guo, Jasmin G. John, Slava Kharin, YoungHo Kim, Tsuyoshi Koshiro, Libin Ma, Dirk Olivié, Swapna Panickal, Fangli Qiao, Xinyao Rong, Nan Rosenbloom, Martin Schupfner, Roland Séférian, Alistair Sellar, Tido Semmler, Xiaoying Shi, Zhenya Song, Christian Steger, Ronald Stouffer, Neil Swart, Kaoru Tachiiri, Qi Tang, Hiroaki Tatebe, Aurore Voldoire, Evgeny Volodin, Klaus Wyser, Xiaoge Xin, Shuting Yang, Yongqiang Yu, and Tilo Ziehn
Earth Syst. Dynam., 12, 253–293, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-12-253-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present an overview of CMIP6 ScenarioMIP outcomes from up to 38 participating ESMs according to the new SSP-based scenarios. Average temperature and precipitation projections according to a wide range of forcings, spanning a wider range than the CMIP5 projections, are documented as global averages and geographic patterns. Times of crossing various warming levels are computed, together with benefits of mitigation for selected pairs of scenarios. Comparisons with CMIP5 are also discussed.
Xiaoying Shi, Daniel M. Ricciuto, Peter E. Thornton, Xiaofeng Xu, Fengming Yuan, Richard J. Norby, Anthony P. Walker, Jeffrey M. Warren, Jiafu Mao, Paul J. Hanson, Lin Meng, David Weston, and Natalie A. Griffiths
Biogeosciences, 18, 467–486, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-467-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-467-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The Sphagnum mosses are the important species of a wetland ecosystem. To better represent the peatland ecosystem, we introduced the moss species to the land model component (ELM) of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) by developing water content dynamics and nonvascular photosynthetic processes for moss. We tested the model against field observations and used the model to make projections of the site's carbon cycle under warming and atmospheric CO2 concentration scenarios.
Hang Wen, Pamela L. Sullivan, Gwendolyn L. Macpherson, Sharon A. Billings, and Li Li
Biogeosciences, 18, 55–75, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-55-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-55-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Carbonate weathering is essential in regulating carbon cycle at the century timescale. Plant roots accelerate weathering by elevating soil CO2 via respiration. It however remains poorly understood how and how much rooting characteristics modify flow paths and weathering. This work indicates that deepening roots in woodlands can enhance carbonate weathering by promoting recharge and CO2–carbonate contact in the deep, carbonate-abundant subsurface.
Binghao Jia, Xin Luo, Ximing Cai, Atul Jain, Deborah N. Huntzinger, Zhenghui Xie, Ning Zeng, Jiafu Mao, Xiaoying Shi, Akihiko Ito, Yaxing Wei, Hanqin Tian, Benjamin Poulter, Dan Hayes, and Kevin Schaefer
Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 235–249, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-235-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-235-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We quantitatively examined the relative contributions of climate change, land
use and land cover change, and elevated CO2 to interannual variations and seasonal cycle amplitude of gross primary productivity (GPP) in China based on multi-model ensemble simulations. The contributions of major subregions to the temporal change in China's total GPP are also presented. This work may help us better understand GPP spatiotemporal patterns and their responses to regional changes and human activities.
Hang Wen, Julia Perdrial, Benjamin W. Abbott, Susana Bernal, Rémi Dupas, Sarah E. Godsey, Adrian Harpold, Donna Rizzo, Kristen Underwood, Thomas Adler, Gary Sterle, and Li Li
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 945–966, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-945-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-945-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Lateral carbon fluxes from terrestrial to aquatic systems remain central uncertainties in determining ecosystem carbon balance. This work explores how temperature and hydrology control production and export of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) at the catchment scale. Results illustrate the asynchrony of DOC production, controlled by temperature, and export, governed by flow paths; concentration–discharge relationships are determined by the relative contribution of shallow versus groundwater flow.
Leila Saberi, Rachel T. McLaughlin, G.-H. Crystal Ng, Jeff La Frenierre, Andrew D. Wickert, Michel Baraer, Wei Zhi, Li Li, and Bryan G. Mark
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 405–425, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-405-2019, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-405-2019, 2019
Short summary
Short summary
The relationship among glacier melt, groundwater, and streamflow remains highly uncertain, especially in tropical glacierized watersheds in response to climate. We implemented a multi-method approach and found that melt contribution varies considerably and may drive streamflow variability at hourly to multi-year timescales, rather than buffer it, as commonly thought. Some of the melt contribution occurs through groundwater pathways, resulting in longer timescale interactions with streamflow.
Hanbo Yun, Qingbai Wu, Qianlai Zhuang, Anping Chen, Tong Yu, Zhou Lyu, Yuzhong Yang, Huijun Jin, Guojun Liu, Yang Qu, and Licheng Liu
The Cryosphere, 12, 2803–2819, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-2803-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-12-2803-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Here we reported the QTP permafrost region was a CH4 sink of −0.86 ± 0.23 g CH4-C m−2 yr−1 over 2012–2016, soil temperature and soil water content were dominant factors controlling CH4 fluxes, and their correlations changed with soil depth due to cryoturbation dynamics. This region was a net CH4 sink in autumn, but a net source in spring, despite both seasons experiencing similar top soil thawing and freezing dynamics.
Donghai Wu, Philippe Ciais, Nicolas Viovy, Alan K. Knapp, Kevin Wilcox, Michael Bahn, Melinda D. Smith, Sara Vicca, Simone Fatichi, Jakob Zscheischler, Yue He, Xiangyi Li, Akihiko Ito, Almut Arneth, Anna Harper, Anna Ukkola, Athanasios Paschalis, Benjamin Poulter, Changhui Peng, Daniel Ricciuto, David Reinthaler, Guangsheng Chen, Hanqin Tian, Hélène Genet, Jiafu Mao, Johannes Ingrisch, Julia E. S. M. Nabel, Julia Pongratz, Lena R. Boysen, Markus Kautz, Michael Schmitt, Patrick Meir, Qiuan Zhu, Roland Hasibeder, Sebastian Sippel, Shree R. S. Dangal, Stephen Sitch, Xiaoying Shi, Yingping Wang, Yiqi Luo, Yongwen Liu, and Shilong Piao
Biogeosciences, 15, 3421–3437, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-3421-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-15-3421-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Our results indicate that most ecosystem models do not capture the observed asymmetric responses under normal precipitation conditions, suggesting an overestimate of the drought effects and/or underestimate of the watering impacts on primary productivity, which may be the result of inadequate representation of key eco-hydrological processes. Collaboration between modelers and site investigators needs to be strengthened to improve the specific processes in ecosystem models in following studies.
Roland Baatz, Pamela L. Sullivan, Li Li, Samantha R. Weintraub, Henry W. Loescher, Michael Mirtl, Peter M. Groffman, Diana H. Wall, Michael Young, Tim White, Hang Wen, Steffen Zacharias, Ingolf Kühn, Jianwu Tang, Jérôme Gaillardet, Isabelle Braud, Alejandro N. Flores, Praveen Kumar, Henry Lin, Teamrat Ghezzehei, Julia Jones, Henry L. Gholz, Harry Vereecken, and Kris Van Looy
Earth Syst. Dynam., 9, 593–609, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-593-2018, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-593-2018, 2018
Short summary
Short summary
Focusing on the usage of integrated models and in situ Earth observatory networks, three challenges are identified to advance understanding of ESD, in particular to strengthen links between biotic and abiotic, and above- and below-ground processes. We propose developing a model platform for interdisciplinary usage, to formalize current network infrastructure based on complementarities and operational synergies, and to extend the reanalysis concept to the ecosystem and critical zone.
Reindert J. Haarsma, Malcolm J. Roberts, Pier Luigi Vidale, Catherine A. Senior, Alessio Bellucci, Qing Bao, Ping Chang, Susanna Corti, Neven S. Fučkar, Virginie Guemas, Jost von Hardenberg, Wilco Hazeleger, Chihiro Kodama, Torben Koenigk, L. Ruby Leung, Jian Lu, Jing-Jia Luo, Jiafu Mao, Matthew S. Mizielinski, Ryo Mizuta, Paulo Nobre, Masaki Satoh, Enrico Scoccimarro, Tido Semmler, Justin Small, and Jin-Song von Storch
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 4185–4208, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4185-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-4185-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
Recent progress in computing power has enabled climate models to simulate more processes in detail and on a smaller scale. Here we present a common protocol for these high-resolution runs that will foster the analysis and understanding of the impact of model resolution on the simulated climate. These runs will also serve as a more reliable source for assessing climate risks that are associated with small-scale weather phenomena such as tropical cyclones.
Bart van den Hurk, Hyungjun Kim, Gerhard Krinner, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Chris Derksen, Taikan Oki, Hervé Douville, Jeanne Colin, Agnès Ducharne, Frederique Cheruy, Nicholas Viovy, Michael J. Puma, Yoshihide Wada, Weiping Li, Binghao Jia, Andrea Alessandri, Dave M. Lawrence, Graham P. Weedon, Richard Ellis, Stefan Hagemann, Jiafu Mao, Mark G. Flanner, Matteo Zampieri, Stefano Materia, Rachel M. Law, and Justin Sheffield
Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2809–2832, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2809-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2809-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
This manuscript describes the setup of the CMIP6 project Land Surface, Snow and Soil Moisture Model Intercomparison Project (LS3MIP).
J. Mao, D. M. Ricciuto, P. E. Thornton, J. M. Warren, A. W. King, X. Shi, C. M. Iversen, and R. J. Norby
Biogeosciences, 13, 641–657, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-641-2016, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-641-2016, 2016
Short summary
Short summary
The aim of this study is to implement, calibrate and evaluate the CLM4 against carbon and hydrology observations from a shading and labeling experiment in a stand of young loblolly pines. We found a combination of parameters measured on-site and calibration targeting biomass, transpiration, and 13C discrimination gave good agreement with pretreatment measurements. We also used observations from the experiment to develop a conceptual model of short-term photosynthate storage and transport.
X. Shi, P. E. Thornton, D. M. Ricciuto, P. J. Hanson, J. Mao, S. D. Sebestyen, N. A. Griffiths, and G. Bisht
Biogeosciences, 12, 6463–6477, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-6463-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-12-6463-2015, 2015
W. D. Collins, A. P. Craig, J. E. Truesdale, A. V. Di Vittorio, A. D. Jones, B. Bond-Lamberty, K. V. Calvin, J. A. Edmonds, S. H. Kim, A. M. Thomson, P. Patel, Y. Zhou, J. Mao, X. Shi, P. E. Thornton, L. P. Chini, and G. C. Hurtt
Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 2203–2219, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2203-2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-2203-2015, 2015
Short summary
Short summary
The integrated Earth system model (iESM) has been developed as a
new tool for projecting the joint human-climate system. The
iESM is based upon coupling an integrated assessment model (IAM)
and an Earth system model (ESM) into a common modeling
infrastructure. By introducing heretofore-omitted
feedbacks between natural and societal drivers in iESM, we can improve
scientific understanding of the human-Earth system
dynamics.
Y. Wei, S. Liu, D. N. Huntzinger, A. M. Michalak, N. Viovy, W. M. Post, C. R. Schwalm, K. Schaefer, A. R. Jacobson, C. Lu, H. Tian, D. M. Ricciuto, R. B. Cook, J. Mao, and X. Shi
Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2875–2893, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2875-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2875-2014, 2014
A. V. Di Vittorio, L. P. Chini, B. Bond-Lamberty, J. Mao, X. Shi, J. Truesdale, A. Craig, K. Calvin, A. Jones, W. D. Collins, J. Edmonds, G. C. Hurtt, P. Thornton, and A. Thomson
Biogeosciences, 11, 6435–6450, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-6435-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-6435-2014, 2014
Short summary
Short summary
Economic models provide scenarios of land use and greenhouse gas emissions to earth system models to project global change. We found, and partially addressed, inconsistencies in land cover between an economic and an earth system model that effectively alter a prescribed scenario, causing significant differences in projected terrestrial carbon and atmospheric CO2 between prescribed and altered scenarios. We outline a solution to this current problem in scenario-based global change projections.
B. Bond-Lamberty, K. Calvin, A. D. Jones, J. Mao, P. Patel, X. Y. Shi, A. Thomson, P. Thornton, and Y. Zhou
Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2545–2555, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2545-2014, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2545-2014, 2014
D. N. Huntzinger, C. Schwalm, A. M. Michalak, K. Schaefer, A. W. King, Y. Wei, A. Jacobson, S. Liu, R. B. Cook, W. M. Post, G. Berthier, D. Hayes, M. Huang, A. Ito, H. Lei, C. Lu, J. Mao, C. H. Peng, S. Peng, B. Poulter, D. Riccuito, X. Shi, H. Tian, W. Wang, N. Zeng, F. Zhao, and Q. Zhu
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 2121–2133, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-2121-2013, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-2121-2013, 2013
Cited articles
Adamson, P. T., Rutherfurd, I. D., Peel, M. C., and Conlan, I. A.: The hydrology of the Mekong River, in: The Mekong, edited by: Campbell, I. C., Elsevier, 53–76, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374026-7.00004-8, 2009. a
Alcamo, J., Döll, P., Henrichs, T., Kaspar, F., Lehner, B., Rösch, T., and Siebert, S.: Development and testing of the WaterGAP 2 global model of water use and availability, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 48, 317–337, 2003. a
Arnell, N. W. and Gosling, S. N.: The impacts of climate change on river flood risk at the global scale, Climatic Change, 134, 387–401, 2016. a
Arnell, N. W., van Vuuren, D. P., and Isaac, M.: The implications of climate policy for the impacts of climate change on global water resources, Global Environ. Chang., 21, 592–603, 2011. a
Bihrat, Ö. and Bayazit, M.: The power of statistical tests for trend detection, Turkish Journal of Engineering and Environmental Sciences, 27, 247–251, 2003. a
Brient, F.: Reducing uncertainties in climate projections with emergent constraints: concepts, examples and prospects, Adv. Atmos. Sci., 37, 1–15, 2020. a
Chen, H., Liu, J., Mao, G., Wang, Z., Zeng, Z., Chen, A., Wang, K., and Chen, D.: Intercomparison of ten ISI-MIP models in simulating discharges along the Lancang-Mekong River basin, Sci. Total Environ., 765, 144494, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144494, 2021. a, b, c, d
Cochrane, T. A., Arias, M. E., and Piman, T.: Historical impact of water infrastructure on water levels of the Mekong River and the Tonle Sap system, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 4529–4541, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-4529-2014, 2014. a
Collins, M., Knutti, R., Arblaster, J., Dufresne, J.-L., Fichefet, T., Friedlingstein, P., Gao, X., Gutowski, W. J., Johns, T., Krinner, G., Shongwe, M., Tebaldi, C., Weaver, A. J., and Wehner, M.: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, IPCC Working Group I Contribution to AR5, Chapter 12 – Long-term climate change: Projections, commitments and irreversibility, IPCC, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.024, 2013. a
Eyler, B.: Last days of the mighty Mekong, Bloomsbury Publishing, Zed Books Ltd, London, https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350221031, 2019. a, b
Field, C. B. and Barros, V. R.: Climate Change 2014–Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Global and Sectoral Aspects, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415386, 2014. a
Frieler, K., Lange, S., Piontek, F., Reyer, C. P. O., Schewe, J., Warszawski, L., Zhao, F., Chini, L., Denvil, S., Emanuel, K., Geiger, T., Halladay, K., Hurtt, G., Mengel, M., Murakami, D., Ostberg, S., Popp, A., Riva, R., Stevanovic, M., Suzuki, T., Volkholz, J., Burke, E., Ciais, P., Ebi, K., Eddy, T. D., Elliott, J., Galbraith, E., Gosling, S. N., Hattermann, F., Hickler, T., Hinkel, J., Hof, C., Huber, V., Jägermeyr, J., Krysanova, V., Marcé, R., Müller Schmied, H., Mouratiadou, I., Pierson, D., Tittensor, D. P., Vautard, R., van Vliet, M., Biber, M. F., Betts, R. A., Bodirsky, B. L., Deryng, D., Frolking, S., Jones, C. D., Lotze, H. K., Lotze-Campen, H., Sahajpal, R., Thonicke, K., Tian, H., and Yamagata, Y.: Assessing the impacts of 1.5 ∘C global warming – simulation protocol of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2b), Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4321–4345, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4321-2017, 2017. a
Giuntoli, I., Vidal, J.-P., Prudhomme, C., and Hannah, D. M.: Future hydrological extremes: the uncertainty from multiple global climate and global hydrological models, Earth Syst. Dynam., 6, 267–285, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-6-267-2015, 2015. a
Gosling, S. N. and Arnell, N. W.: Simulating current global river runoff with a global hydrological model: model revisions, validation, and sensitivity analysis, Hydrol. Process., 25, 1129–1145, 2011. a
Guan, X., Zhang, J., Bao, Z., Liu, C., Jin, J., and Wang, G.: Past variations and future projection of runoff in typical basins in 10 water zones, China, Sci. Total Environ., 798, 149277, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149277, 2021. a, b, c
Hagemann, S., Chen, C., Clark, D. B., Folwell, S., Gosling, S. N., Haddeland, I., Hanasaki, N., Heinke, J., Ludwig, F., Voss, F., and Wiltshire, A. J.: Climate change impact on available water resources obtained using multiple global climate and hydrology models, Earth Syst. Dynam., 4, 129–144, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-4-129-2013, 2013. a
Hall, A., Cox, P., Huntingford, C., and Klein, S.: Progressing emergent constraints on future climate change, Nat. Clim. Change, 9, 269–278, 2019. a
Hamed, K. H.: Improved finite-sample Hurst exponent estimates using rescaled range analysis, Water Resour. Res., 43, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006WR005111, 2007. a
Hanasaki, N., Yoshikawa, S., Pokhrel, Y., and Kanae, S.: A global hydrological simulation to specify the sources of water used by humans, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 789–817, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-789-2018, 2018. a
Hoang, L. P., Lauri, H., Kummu, M., Koponen, J., van Vliet, M. T. H., Supit, I., Leemans, R., Kabat, P., and Ludwig, F.: Mekong River flow and hydrological extremes under climate change, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 3027–3041, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-3027-2016, 2016. a, b
Hoang, L. P., van Vliet, M. T., Kummu, M., Lauri, H., Koponen, J., Supit, I., Leemans, R., Kabat, P., and Ludwig, F.: The Mekong's future flows under multiple drivers: How climate change, hydropower developments and irrigation expansions drive hydrological changes, Sci. Total Environ., 649, 601–609, 2019. a
IPCC: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, vol. in press, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896, 2021. a, b
Johnston, R. and Kummu, M.: Water resource models in the Mekong Basin: a review, Water Resour. Manag., 26, 429–455, 2012. a
Kingston, D. G., Thompson, J. R., and Kite, G.: Uncertainty in climate change projections of discharge for the Mekong River Basin, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 1459–1471, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-1459-2011, 2011. a, b
Knutti, R., Sedláček, J., Sanderson, B. M., Lorenz, R., Fischer, E. M., and Eyring, V.: A climate model projection weighting scheme accounting for performance and interdependence, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 1909–1918, 2017. a
Lauri, H., de Moel, H., Ward, P. J., Räsänen, T. A., Keskinen, M., and Kummu, M.: Future changes in Mekong River hydrology: impact of climate change and reservoir operation on discharge, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 4603–4619, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-4603-2012, 2012. a
Leng, G., Huang, M., Tang, Q., and Leung, L. R.: A modeling study of irrigation effects on global surface water and groundwater resources under a changing climate, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 7, 1285–1304, 2015. a
Baiyinbaoligao, Liu, H., Chen, X., and Mu, X.: Overview of the Mekong River Basin, in: Flood Prevention and Drought Relief in Mekong River Basin, edited by: Liu, H., Springer Singapore, Singapore, 1–25, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2006-8_1, 2020. a
Liu, J., Chen, D., Mao, G., Irannezhad, M., and Pokhrel, Y.: Past and future changes in climate and water resources in the lancang–mekong River Basin: Current understanding and future research directions, Engineering, 13, 144–152, 2022. a
Lu, X. X. and Siew, R. Y.: Water discharge and sediment flux changes over the past decades in the Lower Mekong River: possible impacts of the Chinese dams, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 10, 181–195, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-10-181-2006, 2006. a
Lv, X., Zuo, Z., Ni, Y., Sun, J., and Wang, H.: The effects of climate and catchment characteristic change on streamflow in a typical tributary of the Yellow River, Sci. Rep.-UK, 9, 14535, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-51115-x, 2019. a
Milly, P. C., Dunne, K. A., and Vecchia, A. V.: Global pattern of trends in streamflow and water availability in a changing climate, Nature, 438, 347–350, 2005. a
Müller Schmied, H., Adam, L., Eisner, S., Fink, G., Flörke, M., Kim, H., Oki, T., Portmann, F. T., Reinecke, R., Riedel, C., Song, Q., Zhang, J., and Döll, P.: Variations of global and continental water balance components as impacted by climate forcing uncertainty and human water use, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2877–2898, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-2877-2016, 2016. a
Prudhomme, C., Giuntoli, I., Robinson, E. L., Clark, D. B., Arnell, N. W., Dankers, R., Fekete, B. M., Franssen, W., Gerten, D., Gosling, S. N., Hagemann, S., Hannah, D. M., Kim, H., Masaki, Y., Satoh, Y., Stacke, T., Wada, Y., and Wisser, D.: Hydrological droughts in the 21st century, hotspots and uncertainties from a global multimodel ensemble experiment, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, 3262–3267, 2014. a
Ruiz-Barradas, A. and Nigam, S.: Hydroclimate variability and change over the Mekong River basin: Modeling and predictability and policy implications, J. Hydrometeorol., 19, 849–869, 2018. a
Schewe, J., Heinke, J., Gerten, D., Haddeland, I., Arnell, N. W., Clark, D. B., Dankers, R., Eisner, S., Fekete, B. M., Colón-González, F. J., Gosling, S. N., Kim, H., Liu, X., Masaki, Y., Portmann, F. T., Satoh, Y., Stacke, T., Tang, Q., Wada, Y., Wisser, D., Albrecht, T., Frieler, K., Piontek, F., Warszawski, L., and Kabat, P.: Multimodel assessment of water scarcity under climate change, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, 3245–3250, 2014. a
Schlund, M., Lauer, A., Gentine, P., Sherwood, S. C., and Eyring, V.: Emergent constraints on equilibrium climate sensitivity in CMIP5: do they hold for CMIP6?, Earth Syst. Dynam., 11, 1233–1258, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-11-1233-2020, 2020. a, b
Shiogama, H., Watanabe, M., Kim, H., and Hirota, N.: Emergent constraints on future precipitation changes, Nature, 602, 612–616, 2022. a
Sitch, S., Smith, B., Prentice, I. C., Arneth, A., Bondeau, A., Cramer, W., Kaplan, J. O., Levis, S., Lucht, W., Sykes, M. T., and Thonicke, K.: Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ dynamic global vegetation model, Glob. Change Biol., 9, 161–185, 2003. a
Takata, K., Emori, S., and Watanabe, T.: Development of the minimal advanced treatments of surface interaction and runoff, Global Planet. Change, 38, 209–222, 2003. a
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An Overview of CMIP5 and the Experiment Design, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 485–498, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00094.1, 2012. a
Tran, D. D., van Halsema, G., Hellegers, P. J., Ludwig, F., and Wyatt, A.: Questioning triple rice intensification on the Vietnamese mekong delta floodplains: An environmental and economic analysis of current land-use trends and alternatives, J. Environ. Manage., 217, 429–441, 2018. a
Ul Hasson, S., Pascale, S., Lucarini, V., and Böhner, J.: Seasonal cycle of precipitation over major river basins in South and Southeast Asia: A review of the CMIP5 climate models data for present climate and future climate projections, Atmos. Res., 180, 42–63, 2016. a
Wang, F., Shao, W., Yu, H., Kan, G., He, X., Zhang, D., Ren, M., and Wang, G.: Re-evaluation of the power of the mann-kendall test for detecting monotonic trends in hydrometeorological time series, Front. Earth Sci., 8, 14, https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2020.00014, 2020. a
Wang, W., Lu, H., Ruby Leung, L., Li, H.-Y., Zhao, J., Tian, F., Yang, K., and Sothea, K.: Dam construction in Lancang-Mekong River Basin could mitigate future flood risk from warming-induced intensified rainfall, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 10–378, 2017. a
Warszawski, L., Frieler, K., Huber, V., Piontek, F., Serdeczny, O., and Schewe, J.: The inter-sectoral impact model intercomparison project (ISI–MIP): project framework, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 111, 3228–3232, 2014. a
Yun, X., Tang, Q., Wang, J., Liu, X., Zhang, Y., Lu, H., Wang, Y., Zhang, L., and Chen, D.: Impacts of climate change and reservoir operation on streamflow and flood characteristics in the Lancang-Mekong River Basin, J. Hydrol., 590, 125472, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125472, 2020. a
Yun, X., Tang, Q., Sun, S., and Wang, J.: Reducing Climate Change Induced Flood at the Cost of Hydropower in the Lancang-Mekong River Basin, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL094243, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL094243, 2021. a
Short summary
Climate change can significantly impact river runoff; however, predicting future runoff is challenging. Using historical runoff gauge data to evaluate model performances in runoff simulations for the Mekong River, we quantify future runoff changes in the Mekong River with the best simulation combination. Results suggest a significant increase in the annual runoff, along with varied seasonal distributions, thus heightening the need for adapted water resource management measures.
Climate change can significantly impact river runoff; however, predicting future runoff is...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint