Advertisement

Theoretical and Applied Climatology

, Volume 135, Issue 3–4, pp 1465–1483 | Cite as

Performance of the general circulation models in simulating temperature and precipitation over Iran

  • Mohammadsadegh Abbasian
  • Sanaz MoghimEmail author
  • Ahmad Abrishamchi
Original Paper

Abstract

General Circulation Models (GCMs) are advanced tools for impact assessment and climate change studies. Previous studies show that the performance of the GCMs in simulating climate variables varies significantly over different regions. This study intends to evaluate the performance of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 (CMIP5) GCMs in simulating temperature and precipitation over Iran. Simulations from 37 GCMs and observations from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) were obtained for the period of 1901–2005. Six measures of performance including mean bias, root mean square error (RMSE), Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), linear correlation coefficient (r), Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic (KS), Sen’s slope estimator, and the Taylor diagram are used for the evaluation. GCMs are ranked based on each statistic at seasonal and annual time scales. Results show that most GCMs perform reasonably well in simulating the annual and seasonal temperature over Iran. The majority of the GCMs have a poor skill to simulate precipitation, particularly at seasonal scale. Based on the results, the best GCMs to represent temperature and precipitation simulations over Iran are the CMCC-CMS (Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change) and the MRI-CGCM3 (Meteorological Research Institute), respectively. The results are valuable for climate and hydrometeorological studies and can help water resources planners and managers to choose the proper GCM based on their criteria.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the CMIP5 climate modeling groups (Table 1) and the Climatic Research (CRU) from the University of East Anglia for making their products publicly available. We recognize the UNESCO Chair in Water and Environment Management for Sustainable Cities, Sharif University of Technology for the help in this work. We are thankful to the reviewer whose comments and suggestions improved the paper.

References

  1. Abbasnia M, Toros H (2016) Future changes in maximum temperature using the statistical downscaling model (SDSM) at selected stations of Iran. Model Earth Syst Environ 2:68.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-016-0112-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbaspour KC, Faramarzi M, Ghasemi SS, Yang H (2009) Assessing the impact of climate change on water resources in Iran. Water Resour Res 45:W10434.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2008wr007615 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aloysius NR, Sheffield J, Saiers JE, Li H, Wood EF (2016) Evaluation of historical and future simulations of precipitation and temperature in Central Africa from CMIP5 climate models. J Geophys Res Atmos 121:130–152.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2015jd023656 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Argüeso D, Evans JP, Fita L (2013) Precipitation bias correction of very high resolution regional climate models. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 17:4379–4388.  https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-4379-2013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belda M, Holtanová E, Halenka T, Kalvová J, Hlávka Z (2015) Evaluation of CMIP5 present climate simulations using the Köppen-Trewartha climate classification. Clim Res 64:201–212.  https://doi.org/10.3354/cr01316 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bonsal BR, Prowse TD (2006) Regional assessment of GCM-simulated current climate over Northern Canada. Arctic 59:15–128.  https://doi.org/10.14430/arctic335 Google Scholar
  7. Chen L, Frauenfeld OW (2014) A comprehensive evaluation of precipitation simulations over China based on CMIP5 multimodel ensemble projections. J Geophys Res Atmos 119:5767–5786.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2013jd021190 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dessai S (2005) Limited sensitivity analysis of regional climate change probabilities for the 21st century. J Geophys Res Atmos 110:D19108.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2005jd005919 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gleckler PJ, Taylor KE, Doutriaux C (2008) Performance metrics for climate models. J Geophys Res Atmos 113:D06104.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2007jd008972 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gohari A, Eslamian S, Abedi-Koupaei J, Massah Bavani A, Wang D, Madani K (2013) Climate change impacts on crop production in Iran’s Zayandeh-Rud River Basin. Sci Total Environ 442:405–419.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.10.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hannah L (2015) Climate change biology. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  12. Hao Z, AghaKouchak A, Phillips TJ (2013) Changes in concurrent monthly precipitation and temperature extremes. Environ Res Lett 8:034014.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harris I, Jones P, Osborn T, Lister D (2013) Updated high-resolution grids of monthly climatic observations—the CRU TS3.10 Dataset. Int J Climatol 34:623–642.  https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3711 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hashemi H, Uvo CB, Berndtsson R (2015) Coupled modeling approach to assess climate change impacts on groundwater recharge and adaptation in arid areas. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 19:4165–4181.  https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-4165-2015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. IPCC (1996) Climate Change 1995: Impacts, adaptations, and mitigation of climate change: scientific-technical analyses. Contribution of Working Group II to the second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Watson RT, Zinyowera MC, Moss RH (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  16. IPCC (2007) Climate models and their evaluation. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. IPCC (2013) Summary for policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Sciences Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker TF, Qin, Plattner GK, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley BM (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  18. Johnson F, Sharma A (2009) Measurement of GCM skill in predicting variables relevant for hydroclimatological assessments. J Clim 22:4373–4382.  https://doi.org/10.1175/2009jcli2681.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kharin VV, Zwiers FW, Zhang X, Hegerl GC (2007) Changes in temperature and precipitation extremes in the IPCC Ensemble of Global Coupled Model Simulations. J Clim 20:1419–1444.  https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli4066.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Khazaei MR, Zahabiyoun B, Saghafian B (2011) Assessment of climate change impact on floods using weather generator and continuous rainfall-runoff model. Int J Climatol 32:1997–2006.  https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2416 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Knutti R, Masson D, Gettelman A (2013) Climate model genealogy: generation CMIP5 and how we got there. Geophys Res Lett 40:1194–1199.  https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50256 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kolmogorov AN (1933) Sulla determinazione empirica di una legge di distribuzione. Giornale dell'Istituto Italiano degli Attuari 4:83–91Google Scholar
  23. Loukas A, Vasiliades L, Tzabiras J (2008) Climate change effects on drought severity. Adv Geosci 17:23–29.  https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-17-23-2008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McMahon TA, Peel MC, Karoly DJ (2015) Assessment of precipitation and temperature data from CMIP3 global climate models for hydrologic simulation. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 19:361–377.  https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-361-2015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Miao C, Duan Q, Sun Q, Huang Y, Kong D, Yang T, Ye A, di Z, Gong W (2014) Assessment of CMIP5 climate models and projected temperature changes over Northern Eurasia. Environ Res Lett 9:055007.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/5/055007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nash J, Sutcliffe J (1970) River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I—a discussion of principles. J Hydrol 10:282–290.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nasrollahi N, AghaKouchak A, Cheng L, Damberg L, Phillips T, Miao C et al (2015) How well do CMIP5 climate simulations replicate historical trends and patterns of meteorological droughts? Water Resour Res 51:2847–2864.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2014wr016318 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nazemosadat MJ, Ravan V, Kahya E, Ghaedamini H (2016) Projection of temperature and precipitation in southern Iran using ECHAM5 simulations. Iran J Sci Technol Trans A Sci 40:39–49.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40995-016-0009-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pascale S, Lucarini V, Feng X, Porporato A, Hasson SU (2014) Analysis of rainfall seasonality from observations and climate models. Clim Dyn 44:3281–3301.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-014-2278-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Perkins SE, Pitman AJ, Holbrook NJ, McAneney J (2007) Evaluation of the AR4 climate models’ simulated daily maximum temperature, minimum temperature, and precipitation over Australia using probability density functions. J Clim 20:4356–4376.  https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli4253.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pincus R, Batstone CP, Hofmann RJP, Taylor KE, Glecker PJ (2008) Evaluating the present-day simulation of clouds, precipitation, and radiation in climate models. J Geophys Res 113:D14209.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD00933 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Razmara P, Massah Bavani AR, Motiee H, Torabi S, Lotfi S (2013) Investigating uncertainty of climate change effect on entering runoff to Urmia Lake Iran. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 10:2183–2214.  https://doi.org/10.5194/hessd-10-2183-2013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Reichler T, Kim J (2008) Supplement to how well do coupled models simulate Today’s climate? Bull Am Meteorol Soc 89:S1–S6.  https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-89-3-reichler CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reifen C, Toumi R (2009) Climate projections: past performance no guarantee of future skill? Geophys Res Lett 36:L13704.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2009gl038082 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Samadi S, Carbone GJ, Mahdavi M, Sharifi F, Bihamta MR (2012) Statistical downscaling of climate data to estimate streamflow in a semi-arid catchment. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 9:4869–4918.  https://doi.org/10.5194/hessd-9-4869-2012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Samadi S, Wilson CA, Moradkhani H (2013) Uncertainty analysis of statistical downscaling models using Hadley Centre Coupled Model. Theor Appl Climatol 114:673–690.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-013-0844-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sayari N, Bannayan M, Alizadeh A, Farid A (2012) Using drought indices to assess climate change impacts on drought conditions in the northeast of Iran (case study: Kashafrood basin). Meteorol Appl 20:115–127.  https://doi.org/10.1002/met.1347 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sen PK (1968) Estimates of the regression coefficient based on Kendall’s tau. J Am Stat Assoc 63:1379–1389.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1968.10480934 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shadkam S, Ludwig F, Van Vliet MT, Pastor A, Kabat P (2016) Preserving the world second largest hypersaline lake under future irrigation and climate change. Sci Total Environ 559:317–325.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.03.190 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sillmann J, Kharin VV, Zhang X, Zwiers FW, Bronaugh D (2013) Climate extremes indices in the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble: part 1. Model evaluation in the present climate. J Geophys Res Atmos 118:1716–1733.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50203 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Smirnov NV (1933) Estimate of deviation between empirical distribution functions in two independent sample (in Russian). Bull Moscow Univ 2:3–16Google Scholar
  42. Sonali P, Kumar DN, Nanjundiah RS (2016) Intercomparison of CMIP5 and CMIP3 simulations of the 20th century maximum and minimum temperatures over India and detection of climatic trends. Theor Appl Climatol 128:465–489.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-015-1716-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Taylor KE (2001) Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single diagram. J Geophys Res Atmos 106:7183–7192.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2000jd900719 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Taylor KE, Stouffer RJ, Meehl GA (2009) A summary of the CMIP5 experiment design. PCDMI Rep., 33 pp. [Available online at http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/docs/Taylor_CMIP5_design.pdf]
  45. Taylor KE, Stouffer RJ, Meehl GA (2012) An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 93:485–498.  https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-11-00094.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang L, Chen W (2013) A CMIP5 multimodel projection of future temperature, precipitation, and climatological drought in China. Int J Climatol 34:2059–2078.  https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3822 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Weigel AP, Liniger MA, Appenzeller C (2008) Can multi-model combination really enhance the prediction skill of probabilistic ensemble forecasts? Q J R Meteorol Soc 134:241–260.  https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.210 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yin L, Fu R, Shevliakova E, Dickinson RE (2012) How well can CMIP5 simulate precipitation and its controlling processes over tropical South America? Clim Dyn 41:3127–3143.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-012-1582-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zarghami M, Abdi A, Babaeian I, Hassanzadeh Y, Kanani R (2011) Impacts of climate change on runoffs in East Azerbaijan, Iran. Glob Planet Chang 78:137–146.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2011.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringSharif University of TechnologyTehranIran
  2. 2.Department of Civil Engineering and UNESCO Chair in Water and Environment Management for Sustainable CitiesSharif University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations