Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 586

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A land‐surface hydrology parameterization with subgrid variability for general circulation models

Wood, Eric F., Lettenmaier, Dennis P., Zartarian, Valerie G.·1992·Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres

Abstract

Most of the existing generation of general circulation models (GCMs) use so‐called bucket algorithms to represent land‐surface hydrology. Biosphere‐atmosphere models that include the transfer of energy, mass, and momentum between the atmosphere and the land surface are a recent alternative to this highly simplified representation of the land surface in GCMs. These models require estimation of a large number of parameters for which parameter estimation methods and supporting data remain to be developed. We describe a more incremental approach to generalizing the bucket representation of land‐surface hydrology based on a model that represents the variation in infiltration capacity within a GCM grid cell. The variable infiltration capacity (VIC) model requires estimation of three parameters: an infiltration parameter, an evaporation parameter, and a base flow recession coefficient. The VIC model was explored through direct comparisons with the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) bucket model for the French Broad River, North Carolina, and via sensitivity analysis for the GFDL R30 grid cell which contains the French Broad River. Generally, the bucket model runoff had much greater variability than the historic streamflows for short time scales (e.g., 1 day); the VIC model was much more similar to the observed flows in this respect. The results also showed that the bucket model tended to have unrealistically high short‐term variability. The sensitivity analysis showed that the base flow parameter exerted the greatest influence on both the mean and variability of most of the hydrologic variables, especially winter runoff, summer evaporation, and summer and winter soil moisture.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/91jd01786

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 586

Metadata

Authors
Wood, E. F., Lettenmaier, D. P., & Zartarian, V. G.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
Published
1992-02-28
Volume
97
Issue
D3
Pages
2717-2728
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2062346564
Cited by
586
References
14
FWCI
18.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A land‐surface hydrology parameterization with subgrid variability for general circulation models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/91jd01786
The paper
Wood, E. F., Lettenmaier, D. P., & Zartarian, V. G. (1992). A land‐surface hydrology parameterization with subgrid variability for general circulation models. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/91jd01786

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.