Modeling of historical and future changes in temperature and precipitation in the Panj River Basin in Central Asia under the CMIP5 RCP and CMIP6 SSP scenarios

被引:2
作者
Gulakhmadov, Aminjon [1 ,3 ,4 ]
Chen, Xi [1 ,9 ]
Gulahmadov, Nekruz [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Rizwan, Muhammmad [5 ]
Gulakhmadov, Manuchekhr [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Nadeem, Muhammad Umar [6 ,7 ]
Rakhimova, Moldir [8 ]
Liu, Tie [1 ,9 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Sci, Xinjiang Inst Ecol & Geog, State Key Lab Desert & Oasis Ecol, Urumqi 830011, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Chinese Acad Sci, Beijing 100049, Peoples R China
[3] Natl Acad Sci Tajikistan, Inst Water Problems Hydropower & Ecol, Dushanbe 734042, Tajikistan
[4] Natl Res Univ, Tashkent Inst Irrigat & Agr Mechanizat Engineers, Dept Hydraul & Hydro Informat, Tashkent 60111496, Uzbekistan
[5] Swedish Coll Engn & Technol, Dept Civil Engn, Rahim Yar Khan, Pakistan
[6] Natl Agr Res Ctr, Climate Energy & Water Res Inst, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
[7] Univ Tsukuba, Dept Engn Mech & Energy, Syst & Informat Engn, Ibaraki 3058577, Japan
[8] Al Farabi Kazakh Natl Univ, Space Technol & Remote Sensing Ctr, Alma Ata 050040, Kazakhstan
[9] Zhejiang Univ Technol, Coll Geoinformat, Hangzhou 310014, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
CMIPs; Precipitation; Maximum Temperature; Minimum Temperature; Panj River Basin;
D O I
10.1038/s41598-025-86366-4
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
This study examines the complexities of climate modeling, specifically in the Panj River Basin (PRB) in Central Asia, to evaluate the transition from CMIP5 to CMIP6 models. The research aimed to identify differences in historical simulations and future predictions of rainfall and temperature, examining the accuracy of eight General Circulation Models (GCMs) used in both CMIP5 (RCP4.5 and 8.5) and CMIP6 (SSP2-4.5 and 5-8.5). The evaluation metrics demonstrated that the GCMs have a high level of accuracy in reproducing maximum temperature (Tmax) with a correlation coefficient of 0.96. The models also performed well in replicating minimum temperature (Tmin) with a correlation coefficient of 0.94. This suggests that the models have improved modeling capabilities in both CMIPs. The performance of Max Plank Institute (MPI) across all variables in CMIP6 models was exceptional. Within the CMIP5 domain, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics (GFDL) demonstrated outstanding skill in reproducing maximum temperature (Tmax) and precipitation (KGE 0.58 and 0.34, respectively), while (Institute for Numerical Mathematics) INMCM excelled in replicating minimum temperature (Tmin) (KGE 0.28). The uncertainty analysis revealed a significant improvement in the CMIP6 precipitation bias bands, resulting in a more precise depiction of diverse climate zones compared to CMIP5. Both CMIPs consistently tended to underestimate Tmax in the Csa zone and overestimate it in the Bwk zone throughout all months. Nevertheless, the CMIP6 models demonstrated a significant decrease in uncertainty, especially in ensemble simulations, suggesting improvements in forecasting PRB climate dynamics. The projections revealed a complex story, as the CMIP6 models predict a relatively small increase in temperature and a simultaneous drop in precipitation. This indicates a trend towards more uniform temperature patterns across different areas. Nevertheless, the precipitation forecasts exhibited increased variability, highlighting the intricate interaction of climate dynamics in the PRB area under the impact of global warming scenarios. Hydrological components in global climate models can be further improved and developed with the theoretical reference provided by this study.
引用
收藏
页数:21
相关论文
共 46 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2019, Government of the Republic of Tajikistan was adopted the National Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change in Tajikistan for the period up to 2030
[2]   Colombian climatology in CMIP5/CMIP6 models: Persistent biases and improvements [J].
Arias, Paola A. ;
Ortega, Geusep ;
Villegas, Laura D. ;
Martinez, J. Alejandro .
REVISTA FACULTAD DE INGENIERIA-UNIVERSIDAD DE ANTIOQUIA, 2021, (100) :75-96
[3]   Comparison of CMIP6 and CMIP5 models in simulating mean and extreme precipitation over East Africa [J].
Ayugi, Brian ;
Zhihong, Jiang ;
Zhu, Huanhuan ;
Ngoma, Hamida ;
Babaousmail, Hassen ;
Rizwan, Karim ;
Dike, Victor .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATOLOGY, 2021, 41 (15) :6474-6496
[4]   Intercomparison of the expected change in the temperature and the precipitation retrieved from CMIP6 and CMIP5 climate projections: A Mediterranean hot spot case, Turkey [J].
Bagcaci, S. Cagatay ;
Yucel, Ismail ;
Duzenli, Eren ;
Yilmaz, M. Tugrul .
ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH, 2021, 256
[5]   A Comparative Study of Precipitation and Evaporation between CMIP3 and CMIP5 Climate Model Ensembles in Semiarid Regions [J].
Baker, Noel C. ;
Huang, Huei-Ping .
JOURNAL OF CLIMATE, 2014, 27 (10) :3731-3749
[6]   CPLFD-GDPT5: High-resolution gridded daily precipitation and temperature data set for two largest Polish river basins [J].
Berezowski, Tomasz ;
Szczesniak, Mateusz ;
Kardel, Ignacy ;
Michalowski, Robert ;
Okruszko, Tomasz ;
Mezghani, Abdelkader ;
Piniewski, Mikolaj .
EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCE DATA, 2016, 8 (01) :127-139
[7]  
Bosilovich MG., 2015, MERRA 2 FILE SPECIFI
[8]   Atmospheric Water Balance and Variability in the MERRA-2 Reanalysis [J].
Bosilovich, Michael G. ;
Robertson, Franklin R. ;
Takacs, Lawrence ;
Molod, Andrea ;
Mocko, David .
JOURNAL OF CLIMATE, 2017, 30 (04) :1177-1196
[9]  
Change IC., 2013, Phys. Sci. Basis, V1535, P2013
[10]   Evaluation and comparison of CMIP6 and CMIP5 model performance in simulating the seasonal extreme precipitation in the Western North Pacific and East Asia [J].
Chen, Chao-An ;
Hsu, Huang-Hsiung ;
Liang, Hsin-Chien .
WEATHER AND CLIMATE EXTREMES, 2021, 31