Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
I. Rodríguez‐Iturbe, V. Gupta, E. Waymire (1984)
Scale considerations in the modeling of temporal rainfallWater Resources Research, 20
P. Milly, P. Eagleson (1987)
Effects of spatial variability on annual average water balanceWater Resources Research, 23
J. Dooge (1992)
Sensitivity of Runoff to Climate Change: A Hortonian ApproachBulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 73
D. Legates, C. Willmott (1990)
Mean seasonal and spatial variability in gauge‐corrected, global precipitationInternational Journal of Climatology, 10
W. Langbein (1949)
Annual runoff in the United States
A. Warrick (1980)
13 – Spatial Variability of Soil Physical Properties in the Field
C. Thornthwaite (1948)
An approach toward a rational classification of climate.Geographical Review, 38
P. Milly (1993)
An analytic solution of the stochastic storage problem applicable to soil waterWater Resources Research, 29
K. Beven (1989)
Changing ideas in hydrology — The case of physically-based modelsJournal of Hydrology, 105
Budyko Budyko, Zubenok Zubenok (1961)
Determination of evaporation from the land surfaceIzv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser. Geogr.
P. Milly, K. Dunne (1994)
Sensitivity of the Global Water Cycle to the Water-Holding Capacity of LandJournal of Climate, 7
D. Legates, C. Willmott (1990)
Mean seasonal and spatial variability in global surface air temperatureTheoretical and Applied Climatology, 41
J. Schaake (1989)
Development and application of simple water balance models to understand the relationship between climate and water resources
P. Eagleson (1978)
Climate, soil, and vegetation: 1. Introduction to water balance dynamicsWater Resources Research, 14
P. Eagleson (1978)
Climate, soil, and vegetation: 6. Dynamics of the annual water balanceWater Resources Research, 14
P. Eagleson (1978)
Climate, soil, and vegetation: 4. The expected value of annual evapotranspirationWater Resources Research, 14
P. Milly (1994)
Climate, interseasonal storage of soil water, and the annual water balanceAdvances in Water Resources, 17
This paper describes the development and testing of the hypothesis that the long‐term water balance is determined only by the local interaction of fluctuating water supply (precipitation) and demand (potential evapotranspiration), mediated by water storage in the soil. Adoption of this hypothesis, together with idealized representations of relevant input variabilities in time and space, yields a simple model of the water balance of a finite area having a uniform climate. The partitioning of average annual precipitation into evapotranspiration and runoff depends on seven dimensionless numbers: the ratio of average annual potential evapotranspiration to average annual precipitation (index of dryness); the ratio of the spatial average plant‐available water‐holding capacity of the soil to the annual average precipitation amount; the mean number of precipitation events per year; the shape parameter of the gamma distribution describing spatial variability of storage capacity; and simple measures of the seasonality of mean precipitation intensity, storm arrival rate, and potential evapotranspiration. The hypothesis is tested in an application of the model to the United States east of the Rocky Mountains, with no calibration. Study area averages of runoff and evapotranspiration, based on observations, are 263 mm and 728 mm, respectively; the model yields corresponding estimates of 250 mm and 741 mm, respectively, and explains 88% of the geographical variance of observed runoff within the study region. The differences between modeled and observed runoff can be explained by uncertainties in the model inputs and in the observed runoff. In the humid (index of dryness <1) parts of the study area, the dominant factor producing runoff is the excess of annual precipitation over annual potential evapotranspiration, but runoff caused by variability of supply and demand over time is also significant; in the arid (index of dryness >1) parts, all of the runoff is caused by variability of forcing over time. Contributions to model runoff attributable to small‐scale spatial variability of storage capacity are insignificant throughout the study area. The consistency of the model with observational data is supportive of the supply‐demand‐storage hypothesis, which neglects infiltration excess runoff and other finite‐permeability effects on the soil water balance.
Water Resources Research – Wiley
Published: Jul 1, 1994
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.