How Does Assimilating SMAP Soil Moisture Improve Characterization of the Terrestrial Water Cycle in an Integrated Land Surface‐Subsurface Model?

Abstract Land surface modeling combined with data assimilation can yield highly accurate soil moisture estimates on regional and global scales. However, most land surface models often neglect lateral surface and subsurface flows, which are crucial for water redistribution and soil moisture. This stu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Haojin Zhao, Carsten Montzka, Johannes Keller, Fang Li, Harry Vereecken, Harrie‐Jan Hendricks Franssen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-06-01
Series:Water Resources Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1029/2024WR038647
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849425295326576640
author Haojin Zhao
Carsten Montzka
Johannes Keller
Fang Li
Harry Vereecken
Harrie‐Jan Hendricks Franssen
author_facet Haojin Zhao
Carsten Montzka
Johannes Keller
Fang Li
Harry Vereecken
Harrie‐Jan Hendricks Franssen
author_sort Haojin Zhao
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Land surface modeling combined with data assimilation can yield highly accurate soil moisture estimates on regional and global scales. However, most land surface models often neglect lateral surface and subsurface flows, which are crucial for water redistribution and soil moisture. This study applies the Community Land Model (CLM) and the coupled CLM‐ParFlow model over a 22,500 km2 area in western Germany. Soil moisture retrievals from the Soil Moisture Active Passive mission are assimilated with the Localized Ensemble Kalman Filter (with and without parameter estimation). The simulated soil moisture, evapotranspiration (ET) and groundwater level are evaluated using in situ observations from a Cosmic‐Ray Neutron Sensor network, Eddy Covariance (EC) stations and groundwater measurement wells. The assimilation improves the median correlation between simulated and measured soil moisture from 0.72 ∼ 0.79 to 0.79 ∼ 0.83 and decreases the median unbiased Root Mean Square Error (ubRMSE) from 0.063 ∼ 0.060 cm3/cm3 to 0.050 ∼ 0.045 cm3/cm3. ET characterization shows a limited improvement with a highest ubRMSE reduction of 15% at the Rollesbroich1 site with the CLM‐ParFlow model. The assimilation does not improve the groundwater level characterization. Furthermore, the joint state‐parameter update does not outperform state‐only update. Overall, the simulation of full 3D subsurface hydrology with the ParFlow model component results in additional model outputs like groundwater levels and river stages, and a better soil moisture characterization (compared to CLM stand‐alone), but it does not make soil moisture assimilation more efficient to correct model states.
format Article
id doaj-art-52a2acf6368c446dac7f80b714bb243a
institution Kabale University
issn 0043-1397
1944-7973
language English
publishDate 2025-06-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Water Resources Research
spelling doaj-art-52a2acf6368c446dac7f80b714bb243a2025-08-20T03:29:48ZengWileyWater Resources Research0043-13971944-79732025-06-01616n/an/a10.1029/2024WR038647How Does Assimilating SMAP Soil Moisture Improve Characterization of the Terrestrial Water Cycle in an Integrated Land Surface‐Subsurface Model?Haojin Zhao0Carsten Montzka1Johannes Keller2Fang Li3Harry Vereecken4Harrie‐Jan Hendricks Franssen5Agrosphere Institute (IBG‐3), Forschungszentrum Jülich Jülich GermanyAgrosphere Institute (IBG‐3), Forschungszentrum Jülich Jülich GermanyAgrosphere Institute (IBG‐3), Forschungszentrum Jülich Jülich GermanyAgrosphere Institute (IBG‐3), Forschungszentrum Jülich Jülich GermanyAgrosphere Institute (IBG‐3), Forschungszentrum Jülich Jülich GermanyAgrosphere Institute (IBG‐3), Forschungszentrum Jülich Jülich GermanyAbstract Land surface modeling combined with data assimilation can yield highly accurate soil moisture estimates on regional and global scales. However, most land surface models often neglect lateral surface and subsurface flows, which are crucial for water redistribution and soil moisture. This study applies the Community Land Model (CLM) and the coupled CLM‐ParFlow model over a 22,500 km2 area in western Germany. Soil moisture retrievals from the Soil Moisture Active Passive mission are assimilated with the Localized Ensemble Kalman Filter (with and without parameter estimation). The simulated soil moisture, evapotranspiration (ET) and groundwater level are evaluated using in situ observations from a Cosmic‐Ray Neutron Sensor network, Eddy Covariance (EC) stations and groundwater measurement wells. The assimilation improves the median correlation between simulated and measured soil moisture from 0.72 ∼ 0.79 to 0.79 ∼ 0.83 and decreases the median unbiased Root Mean Square Error (ubRMSE) from 0.063 ∼ 0.060 cm3/cm3 to 0.050 ∼ 0.045 cm3/cm3. ET characterization shows a limited improvement with a highest ubRMSE reduction of 15% at the Rollesbroich1 site with the CLM‐ParFlow model. The assimilation does not improve the groundwater level characterization. Furthermore, the joint state‐parameter update does not outperform state‐only update. Overall, the simulation of full 3D subsurface hydrology with the ParFlow model component results in additional model outputs like groundwater levels and river stages, and a better soil moisture characterization (compared to CLM stand‐alone), but it does not make soil moisture assimilation more efficient to correct model states.https://doi.org/10.1029/2024WR038647soil moisturedata assimilationland surface modellingintegrated hydrological modellingremote sensing
spellingShingle Haojin Zhao
Carsten Montzka
Johannes Keller
Fang Li
Harry Vereecken
Harrie‐Jan Hendricks Franssen
How Does Assimilating SMAP Soil Moisture Improve Characterization of the Terrestrial Water Cycle in an Integrated Land Surface‐Subsurface Model?
Water Resources Research
soil moisture
data assimilation
land surface modelling
integrated hydrological modelling
remote sensing
title How Does Assimilating SMAP Soil Moisture Improve Characterization of the Terrestrial Water Cycle in an Integrated Land Surface‐Subsurface Model?
title_full How Does Assimilating SMAP Soil Moisture Improve Characterization of the Terrestrial Water Cycle in an Integrated Land Surface‐Subsurface Model?
title_fullStr How Does Assimilating SMAP Soil Moisture Improve Characterization of the Terrestrial Water Cycle in an Integrated Land Surface‐Subsurface Model?
title_full_unstemmed How Does Assimilating SMAP Soil Moisture Improve Characterization of the Terrestrial Water Cycle in an Integrated Land Surface‐Subsurface Model?
title_short How Does Assimilating SMAP Soil Moisture Improve Characterization of the Terrestrial Water Cycle in an Integrated Land Surface‐Subsurface Model?
title_sort how does assimilating smap soil moisture improve characterization of the terrestrial water cycle in an integrated land surface subsurface model
topic soil moisture
data assimilation
land surface modelling
integrated hydrological modelling
remote sensing
url https://doi.org/10.1029/2024WR038647
work_keys_str_mv AT haojinzhao howdoesassimilatingsmapsoilmoistureimprovecharacterizationoftheterrestrialwatercycleinanintegratedlandsurfacesubsurfacemodel
AT carstenmontzka howdoesassimilatingsmapsoilmoistureimprovecharacterizationoftheterrestrialwatercycleinanintegratedlandsurfacesubsurfacemodel
AT johanneskeller howdoesassimilatingsmapsoilmoistureimprovecharacterizationoftheterrestrialwatercycleinanintegratedlandsurfacesubsurfacemodel
AT fangli howdoesassimilatingsmapsoilmoistureimprovecharacterizationoftheterrestrialwatercycleinanintegratedlandsurfacesubsurfacemodel
AT harryvereecken howdoesassimilatingsmapsoilmoistureimprovecharacterizationoftheterrestrialwatercycleinanintegratedlandsurfacesubsurfacemodel
AT harriejanhendricksfranssen howdoesassimilatingsmapsoilmoistureimprovecharacterizationoftheterrestrialwatercycleinanintegratedlandsurfacesubsurfacemodel