Search

Precipitation and evapotranspiration, respectively, an input and an output for hydrologists and ocean scientists, but the opposite for meteorologists, quantify the intensity of vertical water exchange between land, ocean, and the atmosphere. The interesting paper by Dagan et al. (2019, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL084173) analyzed important constraints between such fluxes as a function of spatial scales. This commentary aims to provide a complementary, hydrologic point of view, emphasizing how their intermittency at different spatial and temporal scales is essentially related to the contrasting water storage capacities of the atmosphere and the Earth's surface. Alterations of such storage due to global warming and land cover change are a challenge for the geophysical community and beyond. Plain Language Summary: With the common goal of understanding the water cycle, hydrologists look up at the atmosphere and consider precipitation as an input, whereas meteorologists look down at the surface and think of precipitation as an output. These two perspectives on water cycle result in two distinctive yet closely related approaches, focusing on the land surface and the atmosphere, respectively. These dynamics are expected to change in response to the global warming and land use land cover change, increasing the uncertainties of predicting intense droughts and floods. Collaborative research efforts are needed to improve our understanding of the water cycle and mitigate such effects. Key Points: We add a hydrologic perspective to Dagan et al.'s atmospheric perspective on precipitation and evaporation differencesWe discuss the spatial/temporal scaling constraints imposed by the surface hydrologic cycleThese scaling properties are related to the water storage capacities in the land and atmosphere, both of which are expected to change [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Both climate change and human activities are known to have induced changes to hydrology. Consequently, quantifying the net impact of human contribution to the streamfiow change is a challenge. In this paper, a decomposition method based on the Budyko hypothesis is used to quantify the climate (i.e., precipitation and potential evaporation change) and direct human impact on mean annual streamflow (MAS) for 413 watersheds in the contiguous United States. The data for annual precipitation, runoff, and potential evaporation are obtained from the international Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX), which is often assumed to only include gauges unaffected by human interferences. The data are split into two periods (1948-1970 and 1971-2003) to quantify the change over time. Although climate is found to affect MAS more than direct human impact, the results show that assuming the MOPEX data set to be unaffected by human activities is far from realistic. Climate change causes increasing MAS in most watersheds, while the direct human-induced change is spatially heterogeneous in the contiguous United States, with strong regional patterns, e.g., human activities causing increased MAS in the Midwest and significantly decreased MAS in the High Plains. The climate- and human-induced changes are found to be more severe in arid regions, where water is limited. Comparing the results to a collection of independent data sets indicates that the estimated direct human impacts on MAS in this largely nonurban set of watersheds might be attributed to several human activities, such as cropland expansion, irrigation, and the construction of reservoirs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]