Search

Although traditional physical models have been used to analyse groundwater systems, the emergence of novel machine learning models can improve the accuracy of the predictions. Deep learning has been prominent in environmental and climate change problems. In this paper, we present a framework for utilising deep learning models to predict groundwater levels based on nearby streamflow and rainfall data. We address the missing data problem using a Bayesian linear regression model within the deep learning framework. Our deep learning framework utilises models such as long-short term memory (LSTM) networks and convolutional neural networks (CNN) for multi-step ahead time series prediction. We examine the fluctuations in groundwater levels at various boreholes located near Middle Creek in New South Wales, Australia. We use the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS) groundwater database and utilise Bayesian linear regression to impute missing data. We investigate the accuracy of the selected models for individual and regional basins and univariate and multivariate strategies. Our results show that the LSTM-based regional model with multivariate strategy using rainfall data provided the best accuracy. • We predict groundwater levels based on stream flow and rainfall data. • Our framework uses Bayesian data imputation and deep learning for multi-step prediction. • We examine the groundwater fluctuations at various boreholes located in Australia. • Results show a fine-tuned regional model with rainfall data yielded the best accuracy. • We find that LSTM models outperformed CNNs using the multivariate approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Nationwide streamflow projections for Australia informed by CMIP5 and CMIP6. • Vast majority of CMIP5 and CMIP6 GCMs project less winter rainfall across Australia. • Lower winter rainfall translates to a significant reduction in annual runoff. • Modelled median projection of runoff shows a 50% reduction in far southwest Australia. • Modelled median projection of runoff shows a 20% reduction in far southeast Australia. Projections of streamflow under future climate are essential for developing adaptation strategies in the water and related sectors. This paper presents nationwide streamflow projections for Australia informed by climate change signals in CMIP6 GCMs and compares the projections with those from CMIP5 GCMs. The modelled future runoff projections driven by CMIP5 and CMIP6 GCMs are relatively similar for far southern Australia. The median projection is a 50% reduction in mean annual runoff in far southwest Australia and 20% reduction in far southeast Australia by 2046–2075 relative to 1976–2015 under the high SSP5-8.5/RCP8.5 global warming scenario. The vast majority of CMIP5 and CMIP6 GCMs project less winter rainfall across Australia. As most of the runoff in far southern Australia occurs in winter and spring, the lower winter rainfall translates to a significant reduction in annual runoff. It is therefore prudent to plan and manage for a reduction in future water resources, particularly in the densely populated and important agricultural regions in southeast Australia. There is less agreement between GCMs in the summer rainfall projection, with the CMIP6 GCMs generally projecting a wetter future (or smaller decrease in rainfall) than the CMIP5 GCMs. The modelled median projection for mean annual runoff is a 10% reduction in the south-east coast, 5% reduction in the north-east coast and little change in northern Australia. More GCMs project an increase rather than a decrease in the interannual variability of rainfall, and this would further amplify multi-year hydrological droughts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Daily flow statistics (indicators) are key to understanding flow-ecology interaction. • This study examined whether monthly data can be used to describe daily flow regimes. • A suite of 173 flow indicators were converted to a monthly timestep where possible. • Around half of monthly indicators had strong correlations with their daily versions. • Using only monthly data, good predictions were achieved for 90% of daily indicators. Flow indicators based on daily flow data are commonly used to characterize the hydrologic regimes of rivers and to investigate links between flow and ecological condition. Discharge data measured at a daily timestep is considered essential for such investigations because there is an underlying premise that longer timesteps (e.g. monthly) are not suitable for capturing the variability in flow behaviour of most relevance to ecologically important processes. This paper investigates this assumption by examining the information content of daily and monthly streamflow data for a diversity of perennial, intermittent and ephemeral flow regimes across Australia, using a novel approach of comparing daily and monthly flow indicators rather than observed flow timeseries. Results show that many flow indicators derived using daily and monthly data are strongly correlated (Spearman ρ greater than 0.9). Partial least squares regression shows that the majority of daily flow indicators can be predicted using monthly flow indicators, and that as few as six monthly flow indicators can be used to estimate a wide range of daily flow characteristics, including those relating to flow magnitudes, and durations of high and low flow events. Daily indicators relating to the frequency and seasonal timing of high and low flows cannot be predicted as accurately (R2 between 0.4 and 0.9), suggesting that information on these facets of the flow regime is partially lost when aggregating to a monthly timestep. Results from this study point to the utility of monthly-based flow indicators in river ecology, opening new opportunities to overcome limitations in gauge network coverage and data resolution in many parts of the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] • Wildfires are becoming more severe and frequent and their effects increasingly expose water resources to stress. • Climate, wildfire, streamflow records (1975 to 2018), topography, and landcover data from 92 catchments were combined to quantify the contribution of wildfire to streamflow variability across Australian temperate forests. • On average wildfire regimes relatively results in 8.8% increases in streamflow across Australian temperate forests. • Wildfire effects on regional streamflow varied spatially depending on hydroclimate factors, particularly precipitation. As wildfires become more frequent and severe, there are concerns regarding their impacts on water yield from forested catchments. While there are many studies in Australia about the effects of individual wildfires on streamflow at fine scales (<1 km2) in specific geographic settings, the effects of wildfire regimes on streamflow at broad spatial scales across temperate forests in Australia are not well understood. In this paper, we combined climate, wildfire, streamflow records (1975 to 2018), topographic, and landcover data from 92 catchments (74 – 4740 km2) in the Australian temperate zone to quantify the contribution of wildfire regimes over time to streamflow variability in different hydroclimatic settings (humid, dry sub-humid, and semi-arid) and geographic regions (Southeast Australia (SEA), Southwest Western Australia (SWWA), and Tasmania (TAS)). Wildfire regimes were represented by two metrics: the burnt area to drainage area (BDA) ratio for wildfire events in each year and a spatially averaged metric of Time Since Fire (TSF), which is a spatial average of time since the last wildfire in the catchment. By comparing prefire and postfire runoff ratios our study found that on average there was a short-term increase in runoff ratio (∼3% in year 1 and ∼6% in year 2 post-fire) after wildfires with BDA > 25%. No influence of fire was found in the long-term (15–20 years after the wildfire) runoff ratio. We found that wildfire regime, measured by TSF, explained ∼8.8% of the variation in annual streamflow across the Australian temperate zone, and that with decreasing TSF (i.e., increased wildfire impact), the average streamflow increased. Streamflow variation explained by wildfire regimes varied with hydroclimate. The explained variance of streamflow by wildfire regimes in semi-arid catchments (23%) and dry sub-humid catchments (13%) were higher than humid catchments (5%). Our results provide a broad-scale understanding of how wildfire regimes influence streamflow variability at broad temporal and spatial scales, and provided important context and baseline information for determining the implications of changes in climate and fire regimes for regional water availability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]