• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Global Freshwater Storage Capability across Time Scales in the GRACE Satellite Era

    2021-06-04 08:37:56EndaZHUandXingYUAN
    Advances in Atmospheric Sciences 2021年6期

    Enda ZHU and Xing YUAN

    1Key Laboratory of Regional Climate-Environment for Temperate East Asia (RCE-TEA), Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, China

    2School of Hydrology and Water Resources, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China

    3College of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China

    ABSTRACT

    Key words:freshwater, GRACE, land surface model, soil moisture, climate variability, storage capability

    1.Introduction

    Freshwater is widely viewed as a fundamental natural resource, yet it is threatened by human activities (Meybeck,2003). Over the last 50 years, water consumption has tripled due to global warming, population increase, and urbanization (Carbon Disclosure Project, 2010). Currently, nearly 80% of the global population and 65% of continents suffer from water scarcity (V?r?smarty et al., 2010). Water stress has become an inevitable obstacle to sustainable development, and freshwater security has been listed as one of the grand challenges in the coming decades by the World Climate Research Programme (Trenberth and Asrar, 2014). Terrestrial water storage (TWS) is the most ubiquitous source for high-quality freshwater which not only supports food and livestock production but also influences various aspects of the natural environment, such as affecting sea level(Pokhrel et al., 2012) and the rotation of the Earth (Kuehne and Wilson, 1991).

    The TWS can be divided into surface water, soil water,snow, and groundwater. Recently, due to the vital impacts of water on sustaining human society and ecosystems, its changes over land (e.g., streamflow and TWS) have been extensively investigated. For instance, the Yellow River streamflow displays a persistent decline, and climate factors can explain about 65% of the trend (Piao et al., 2010). For TWS, similar declining trends have been observed in southern and eastern Europe (Stahl et al., 2010), northwestern North America, and the Gulf of Mexico (Kalra et al., 2008).In contrast, a slight increase in streamflow is found over the Yangtze River (Piao et al., 2010) and the Amazon River(Scanlon et al., 2018). In the future, the river discharge is projected to increase over high northern latitudes, India, and Africa, and is expected to decrease in the Mediterranean region, Australia, and parts of North and South America under a high greenhouse gas emission scenario (Schewe et al., 2014). However, the ability of the global land to retain freshwater, which directly influences the freshwater fluxes,receives less attention due to the lack of appropriate methods and global-scale observations.

    McColl et al. (2017) introduced a new metric called,stored precipitation fraction, to quantify the ability of surface soil to retain a positive freshwater anomaly after hours to days during 2016, based on soil moisture observations from NASA’s Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) mission. It can be viewed as a measure of surface soil memory.They found that surface soils (depth of 0-5 cm) accounted for less than 0.001% of the global freshwater storage, but retained 14% of precipitation after three days and that this fraction decreases rapidly as time increases. Hence, for longer prediction, deeper soil moisture and other terrestrial water components should be considered as indicators of TWS. Land-atmosphere coupled modeling experiments have shown land surface conditions, including snow mass and deeper soil, are crucial sources of predictability on seasonal timescales (Koster et al., 2011). The TWS involving various kinds of water can be applied to improve seasonal fire forecasts (Chen et al., 2013), and the memory of TWS can provide additional information for long-term hydrological prediction (Yuan and Zhu, 2018; Zhu et al., 2019).Therefore, the storage capability of the land and its components, such as deeper soil layers, snow, river, lake, and canopy need further investigation, especially on longer time scales. Here, we modify the method proposed by McColl et al. (2017) to quantify the freshwater storage capability(FSC) for land and various TWS components and provide further analysis regarding the land surface storage capability and its hydrological dynamics at different time scales over global major river basins.

    The FSC is jointly controlled by complex factors such as land cover, precipitation, and potential evapotranspiration (PET). Investigating the spatiotemporal distribution of FSC provides implications for the global water balance in a changing climate. Based on the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites (Tapley et al., 2004),large-scale terrestrial water storage change (TWSC) can be measured efficiently (Scanlon et al., 2012). In addition,TWSC can also be reasonably simulated by advanced land surface models (LSMs) (Lawrence et al., 2019). The spaceborne observations and state-of-the-art LSMs provide an opportunity to revisit the FSC of global land.

    Considering that GRACE satellites only provide TWS anomaly (TWSA) observations on monthly time scale, we use GRACE TWSA and global precipitation observations to quantify the monthly FSC of the land (including storage within surface water bodies, soil, snow, and aquifers). Then,a state-of-the-art community land model (CLM5)(Lawrence et al., 2019) was applied to provide finer simulation for further analysis regarding the FSC features for TWS, snow, and different soil layers across multiple time scales. Lastly, the study investigates the decadal variability of FSC by connecting it with major modes of internal climate variability.

    2.Data and methods

    In an effort to reduce uncertainty, we apply three global precipitation datasets. These include products sourced from the Global Precipitation Climatology Centre (GPCC) (Udo et al., 2011), the Climatic Research Unit-National Centers for Environmental Prediction (CRU-NCEP) (Viovy, 2018),and the Precipitation Reconstruction over Land (PREC)(Chen et al., 2002). In addition, we use the PET dataset provided by the Global Land Evaporation Amsterdam Model (GLEAM), which maximizes the recovery of evaporation information contained in current satellite observations(Miralles et al., 2011; Martens et al., 2017), and the leaf area index (LAI) dataset which is based on Global Land Surface Satellite (GLASS) (Xiao et al., 2016) from 2001 to 2014.

    The mean of GRACE mascon products provided by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) (Swenson and Wahr, 2006;Landerer and Swenson, 2012; Swenson, 2012; Wiese et al.,2016), Center for Space Research (CSR) (Save et al., 2016),and German Research Centre For Geosciences (GFZ)(Dahle et al., 2012) is viewed as the global TWSA observation, which spans 14 years from 2003 to 2016. Furthermore,the SMAP soil moisture from 2015 to 2016 (Entekhabi et al., 2010) is used to validate the model simulation. Besides that, the CLM5 is applied to provide credible, long-term simulations of the TWS and its components, further noting that good model performance has been shown in previous studies (Niu et al., 2007; Xia et al., 2017). In this model, the TWS involves soil moisture, canopy water, snow, and surface water for rivers, lakes, and wetlands. It resolves the water and energy balance from the ground surface down to 8.6 m by dividing it into 20 hydrologically active layers(Lawrence et al., 2019). Compared with the previous models (i.e., CLM4 and CLM4.5), the CLM5 increased the vertical resolution of the soil layer, especially within the top 3 m, and removed unconfined aquifers (Lawrence et al.,2019). Meanwhile, the model is updated to account for spatial variations in soil thickness from a spatially explicit bedrock dataset (Brunke et al., 2016; Pelletier et al., 2016).When soil is below the bedrock, the soil moisture is close to or equal to zero. In this study, we used the biogeophysical part of CLM5, noting that the carbon-nitrogen processes were switched off. Two continuous centurial cycles (i.e., the first cycle ending acts as the initial condition of the second cycle) of CLM5 simulation, with a spatial resolution of onedegree, are carried out during 1901-2016 and were driven by the CRUNCEP observed meteorological forcing datasets (Piao et al., 2012). The last 66-year simulations during 1951-2016 in the second cycle are analyzed and the first 166-year simulations are regarded as land surface model spin-up, noting that the aquifer model needs a long time to reach the equilibrium (Yang et al., 1995).

    To quantify the ability of the land to store freshwater,we use a newly proposed metric called stored precipitation fraction (McColl et al., 2017). The FSC(t) represents the increasing water in land normalized by precipitation as follows,

    where

    where Pis the sum of precipitation in the ith time step,ΔVstands for the change of water for different components of TWS (or the change of TWS) in the ith time step, Δ Vrepresents the increase of water for TWS components (or the increase of TWS) at given time step, ΔTWSis the change of TWS in the ith time step, t is the analysis time step (from one day to one month in this study), and T represents the total time span (e.g., 2003-16). Considering that the change of soil moisture affects infiltration and capillarity, we choose ΔTWSas the only threshold to study the contributions of different TWS components to the total FSC.Because the GRACE data only provides monthly TWSA,the central difference method is applied to calculate the average change in TWS from one month to the other (Zhang et al., 2018),

    where Vis the volume of the ith TWS observation. For CLM5 simulation, we use the TWS value on the last day of the prescribed time step minus the one on the first day of the time step to get the TWSC. Note that McColl et al.(2017) used this precipitation fraction to analyze the surface soil moisture response to precipitation at three-day time scale, while here we use it to quantify the FSC for TWS and soil at different depths from daily to monthly time scales.

    In the water balance equation [d(TWSA)/dt = P - ET -R, where P is precipitation, ET is evapotranspiration, and R is runoff] the impact of runoff, including lateral flow, on the increase of TWS cannot be ignored especially for longer time scales and deeper soil at a given point. However, the precipitation is the only input for a river basin that normally retains water and allows no outflow to other basins (Fig. 1),and the positive change of TWS stands for the volume of precipitation that is retained in a basin. Hence, this study analyzes the FSC of land and soil columns at different depths over global major river basins (Yuan et al., 2015) rather than grids. The selected 194 river basins, based on the Global Energy and Water EXchanges (GEWEX) project,cover most of the land surface representing a broad range of climate and land cover conditions. In this regard, the FSC describes the proportion of precipitation falling on land that can be retained in the basin after a given time, which is closely linked with water security.

    The impacts of the uncertainty of the observations (e.g.,TWS and precipitation) are nontrivial. To estimate the influences of uncertainty in precipitation datasets, we calculate the standard deviations of three groups of FSC based on mean values of TWSA from different centers and the three precipitation datasets, respectively. Conversely, to estimate the influence of GRACE uncertainty, the standard deviations of three groups of FSC based on the mean precipitation and TWSA from different centers are calculated.

    Fig. 1. A schematic diagram of water exchange between different soil columns. TWS includes all the forms of storage,such as river, lake, canopy water, snow, ice, soil moisture, and groundwater.

    Lastly, to investigate the decadal variability of total land water-based FSC, 57 groups of 10-years of CLM5 simulation (i.e., 1951-60, 1952-61, 1953-62, …) are used to estimate FSC, respectively. We also calculate the anomaly correlation coefficient (ACC) between the decadal FSC and the climate indices (i.e., PDO, IPO, and AMO). The monthly climate indices are obtained at https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/climateindices/list, and they are aggregated into 10-year running mean values. In this study, the significances of ACC are determined by the student’s T-test.

    3.Results

    Figure 2 shows the FSC based on the average of GRACE TWS from different centers (i.e., CSR, JPL, and GFZ) and the average of precipitation datasets (i.e., GPCC,CRU-NCEP, and PREC). The weighted average of FSC across the global basins is 0.28, which means that 28% of precipitation can be retained by the land after one month.However, the distribution of FSC is spatially uneven over the globe. Generally, the lower FSC is mainly located in monsoonal regions, including southern and northeastern China,eastern North America, and parts of South America and Africa while FSC is large in arid basins, such as the Middle-East, parts of Africa, and the west coast of America. The larger value is indicative of a greater ability to retain a positive anomaly for a river basin, noting that a reliable estimate of FSC relies on the accuracy of observation. Regional differences do exist among different precipitation and TWSA datasets. Therefore, we show the standard deviation of FSC that is due to the uncertainty of TWS and precipitation (Fig. 3ab). We can see that larger standard deviations are mainly located over the arid or semi-arid regions, such as high-latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, the middle of Asia, parts of the Sahara, and the Arabian Peninsula (Fig. 3a), where a small observation error would exert a great influence on the estimates of FSC. Similarly, the influence of precipitation uncertainty is nontrivial over arid regions (Fig. 3b).However, the impact of precipitation uncertainty is relatively small, except in the Amazon, Congo, Middle East and high latitudes (Fig. 3c), where the in-situ observations are insufficient.

    To explore factors that influence the FSC, we analyze the distributions of the observed FSC which are conditional on the magnitude of the aridity index and LAI (Fig. 4). Previous works (McColl et al., 2017) found that the surface soil FSC is smaller in wet regions due to the significant increases in drainage which occurs when soil moisture increases. Here, we arrive at a similar conclusion that total land water-based FSC significantly increases with the increase of aridity (r = 0.92, p < 0.05) (Fig. 4a). Meanwhile,the impact of LAI on total land water-based FSC is significant and should be considered as well. It is found that FSC decreases with increasing LAI, which means that a greater LAI reduces the ability for land to retain water due to larger evapotranspiration. The correlation between them is?0.36 (p < 0.05) (Fig.4b).

    Due to the availability of GRACE, the simulation with CLM5 is a good choice to analyze FSC for land and its different components, such as soil at different depths and snow,at finer temporal resolution. Following Yuan and Zhu(2018), we utilize the CRU-NCEP dataset, in which precipitation is consistent with CRU at monthly time scale, as the atmospheric forcing for running the CLM5 simulation. We compared the seasonal TWSC from the GRACE and CLM5 simulations spanning the period from 2003 to 2016. The CLM5 simulation presents reasonable distributions of seasonal TWSC over the major global river basins (Fig. 5), and the ACCs between them are 0.66 (MAM), 0.92 (JJA), 0.77(SON), and 0.85 (DJF) (p < 0.05), respectively. Additionally, compared to the SMAP observation from 2015 to 2016, the CLM5 can simulate the climatological distribution of surface soil moisture (5 cm) reasonably well except over high-latitude and rainforest regions where both simulations and observations may have large uncertainties (Fig. 6).The ACC over 194 basins between the SMAP observations and CLM5 simulation is 0.69 (p < 0.01). Therefore, CLM5-simulated TWS and soil moisture are used for the FSC analysis in this study. Compared with the observation (Fig. 2),CLM5 reasonably captures the climatology of the FSC distribution of the land surface (Fig. 7a) in most river basins. The basin weighted average simulated FSC (0.26) is smaller than the observation (0.28), and the ACC between them is 0.45 (p < 0.05). Moreover, the simulated total land waterbased FSC shows obvious seasonal variations, especially at high-latitudes (not shown). It is large in fall (SON) and winter (DJF) (weighted means are 0.24 and 0.5, respectively) and small in spring (MAM) and summer (JJA) (0.10 and 0.07). The phenomena are closely related to freezing and melting processes because winter precipitation at northern latitudes will mostly remain on land as snow and ice until spring. However, it is noteworthy that the CLM5 simulation in this study does not include the impact of human activity, such as pumping, irrigation, and land cover change that are implicitly presented in the GRACE observation. So the differences between them, which are mainly located in North China and Central America, might be attributed to anthropogenic influences.

    Fig. 2. Global distribution of total land water-based freshwater storage capability (FSC). FSC is estimated by an average of GRACE observed terrestrial water storage (TWS) from three centers (i.e., CSR, JPL, and GFZ) and the ensemble means of precipitation observation datasets from GPCC, PREC, and CRUNCEP during 2003-16.

    Fig. 3. The uncertainty of FSC due to TWS observation (standard deviation σTWS) (a),precipitation observation (standard deviation σpr ) (b), and the ratio between the uncertainties( σpr/σ TWS) (c). (a) The uncertainty (standard deviation σTWS) of FSC due to different TWS observations is based on mean values of different precipitation datasets (PREC, GPCC, and CRU-NCEP) and GRACE TWSA from different centers (CSR, JPL, and GFZ) during 2003-16. (b) The uncertainty (standard deviation σpr ) of FSC due to different precipitation observations is based on mean values of TWS from the three centers and different precipitation datasets (PREC, GPCC, and CRU-NCEP) during 2003-16. (c) The standard deviationofFSCdueto precipitationobservations ( σpr) is divided by the standard deviation ofFSCdueto TWSobservations(σ TWS).

    Fig. 4. (a-b) The relationship between FSC and aridity index/LAI over 194 major river basins. In (a) and (b), the anomaly correlation coefficients are 0.92 and ?0.36 (p < 0.05),respectively.

    Land surface water is stored as various components including snow, surface water, canopy water, and soil moisture at different depths. Therefore, the total land waterbased FSC is controlled by a series of complicated land hydrological dynamic processes (e.g., internal drainage, capillary effect). Due to the lack of large-scale and long-term observations of these components, LSMs are widely used to provide spatiotemporal continuous estimations in practical applications. Although more water is stored in deep soil(below 3 m), the snow and soil at the top 3 m play nontrivial roles in the land FSC. Here, we investigate the temporal and spatial characteristics of FSC for various depths of soil and snow based on the CLM5 simulation. To analyze the FSC for surface and deep layer soil, we divide the soil column into three layers including depths of 0-0.1 m (surface soil), 0.1-1 m (middle soil), and 1-3 m (deep soil). It is worth noting that the bedrock depth is less than 3 m, or even 1 m in some areas, and the soil moisture most often is equal to 0 when the soil is below the bedrock, while the averaged depth in most basins is over 3 m. Therefore, in this study,the soil moisture in the 1-3 m (0.1-1 m) column over basins represents the total soil water from 1 m (0.1 m) to 3 m (1 m)or bedrock. In the simulation, the global basins weighted averaged FSC for them are 0.04, 0.11, and 0.03 at monthly time scale, respectively (Figs. 7b?7d). Although a large proportion of TWS is stored in deep soil layers over most river basins, the middle soil column (0.1-1 m) contributes to about 40% of the land FSC, especially in arid or semi-arid regions (Fig. 7c). In addition, the impact of snow should be emphasized in high latitudes where more precipitation is stored as snow instead of soil moisture in the middle soil layer, which is closely related to the large land FSC over these regions (Fig. 7e). Therefore, besides the surface soil water that can be measured by microwave remote sensing(McColl et al., 2017), the middle soil layer and snow should also be considered in the FSC analysis, especially at longer time scales.

    For the global basins, using the CLM5 simulation, we calculate the weighted mean FSC for land, the three layers of soil columns, and snow from day 1 to day 30 (Fig. 8a-b),respectively. In general, total land water-based FSC has decreased by about 38% in 30 days (Fig. 8a). The results based on the CLM5 simulation show that the surface soil FSC rapidly decreases during the first week (Fig. 8a) due to the combined effects of evaporation and internal drainage.The middle soil FSC also decreases from 0.16 to 0.11, but a slight increase in deep soil FSC is noted from 1 day to 30 days, due to the slow water movement. In addition, the decreasing trend of snow FSC is small as well, which contributes more than 20% to the land FSC after three days (Fig. 8b).Despite the large decrease of middle soil FSC across time scales, this layer contributes about 40% to the global total land water-based FSC at various time scales (Fig. 8b). We further note that the contribution by the surface soil is nontrivial at short intervals, but the storage of freshwater by snow plays a more important role than the surface soil after five days (Fig. 8b).

    Fig. 5. Validation of CLM5-simulated (left) seasonal mean terrestrial water storage change (TWSC) against GRACE satellite retrievals (right) averaged over 194 river basins during 2003-16.

    With the time step increasing, the decrease of FSC can be observed globally, especially in monsoonal regions such as western America, southern China, India, and parts of Africa (Fig. 9a-9o). Compared with the work of McColl et al. (2017), the distribution of the surface soil FSC at 3 days(Fig. 9b) is similar, with higher FSC mainly located in arid and semiarid regions, such as parts of the Middle East, central Asia, and northwestern China, where the water cycle at the interface of the atmosphere and the land surface overturns at a slower rate. For the global basins in this study, the weighted averaged FSC for surface soil at three days is 0.09, which is smaller than the value of 0.14 found by McColl et al. (2017), noting that our surface column is thicker than the SMAP observation (5 cm). The middle soil column contributes most to the total land water-based FSC,especially in semi-arid regions such as central Asia, western America, and the Middle East (Figs. 9c, h, m), and the change of deep soil FSC is not obvious. Despite the major impacts of the middle soil layer (Fig. 8b), the impact of snow is comparable to the middle soil in some basins, especially in high latitudes (Fig. 9e), even at short time scales.

    To investigate the decadal variability of global FSC,Figs. 10a-c display the spatial distributions of the ACC between climate indexes (i.e., PDO, AMO, and IPO) and the 10-year moving average of FSC for land from 1951-2016, based on a CLM5 simulation. The total land waterbased FSC of Eastern Australia and parts of the mid-and high-latitudes of Asia presents a positive correlation with the PDO, while the ACCs for most basins in Africa and North America are negative (Fig. 10a). The AMO plays a major role in the Amazon and Sahara where the FSC is large when the AMO is positive, while its impact on Australia is the opposite (Fig. 10b). In addition, the spatial pattern of the ACC between IPO and FSC is similar to that of the PDO, except in the Amazon and Mississippi River basins (Fig. 10c).

    Fig. 6. The climatological distribution of surface soil moisture (5 cm) based on (a)SMAP observation and (b) CLM5 simulation from June, 2015 to December, 2016.

    Fig. 7. The FSC of land (a), soil columns at different depths (b-d), and snow (e). The TWS, soil moisture at different depths and snow are simulated by CLM5 over river basins during 2003-16.

    Fig. 8. (a) The weighted averaged FSC for land, snow, and different soil columns at various depths across time scales for global river basins. (b) The contributions of snow and soil moisture at different depths to the total land water-based FSC. All statistics are based on the data during 2003-16.

    Fig. 9. Distribution of FSC for land, different soil columns, and snow over global river basins for 3-day (a-e), 10-day (f-j),and 20-day (k-o) time scales based on CLM5 simulations during 2003-16.

    Fig. 10. (a-c) Anomaly correlation coefficients between CLM5-simulated total land waterbased FSC and the climate indices (PDO, IPO, and AMO) during 1951-2016.

    4.Conclusions

    This study applies a state-of-the-art method to measure FSC over global major river basins and investigates the associated hydrological dynamics through observations and land model simulations. Based on the retrievals of GRACE satellites and multisource precipitation observations, the estimated land FSC on a monthly time scale is over 0.35 for 25%of the river basins, especially in parts of the Middle East, central Asia, and high-latitude regions. In terms of weighted average, over one-fourth of the rainfall can be retained in basins after one month. Although the simulated total land waterbased FSC is smaller than observations, the correlation between them is significant. In addition, the climate condition and land cover exert great influences on the FSC, with significant positive (negative) correlation between FSC and the aridity index (LAI).

    The GRACE satellites provide valuable measurements for an integrated estimation of global FSC on monthly time scale, and the CLM5 land model simulations can be used to separate the contributions of different TWS components to the FSC across multiple time scales. Although the TWS can be divided into different components, the globally averaged TWS changes can be mainly partitioned between the change of soil moisture and snow (Syed et al., 2008). Similarly, we find that a large proportion of water is stored in the deeper soil, but the middle soil column (0.1-1 m) has the largest impact on the storage capability, especially in some basins,like Western Europe. Although the aquifer is another crucial component of TWS, we were not able to analyze its impacts on FSC because the CLM5 removed the unconfined aquifer module. The aquifer is recharged mainly by the water infiltration through the lower boundary, but we think the impact of aquifer on basin-scale land FSC is relatively small on monthly time scale due to the long residence times of groundwater. Nevertheless, the impacts of groundwater on longer time scales at specific regions need to be further analyzed through appropriate observations and quantification methods. Surface soil contributes more than 25% to the FSC at short time scales especially in arid regions, but it declines quickly over time, noting that snow gradually plays a more important role, especially in high-latitude regions.Therefore, middle soil moisture and snow should be considered in the analysis of the global FSC, especially at longer time scales.

    The GRACE data is able to represent the impact of human activities, but the CLM5 simulations in this study ignored anthropogenic influences. Although the impact of human intervention does not contribute much to the total water storage change in large parts of the world, it should be significant and thus accounted for in areas where human activities are intensive (Haddeland et al., 2014). The difference between FSC based on observation and simulation could partly be attributed to the influence of humans, and the issue deserves more attention in some specific regions,such as North China, India, and North America. Besides that, inter-basin water transfers also need more attention,which is common in many countries such as China, America, India, and Australia (Allison and Meselhe, 2010).

    Due to the long residence time, the variation in TWS containing previous climate information can affect the subsequent weather and climate through a series of complicated land-atmosphere feedback processes. Therefore, the memory from TWS, which can be measured with FSC, is a non-negligible source of climate predictability (Reager and Famiglietti, 2009). Though the memory is always viewed as a stationary feature of TWS or other components, we find that the internal climate variability or external climate forcings can alter the land memory time scale. Here, we show the response of the FSC to decadal climate variability. Our work represented the variability of FSC to climate indexes,such as the PDO, AMO, and IPO. Besides the internal climate variability, human interventions, such as land use/land cover change, and the management of water resources (e.g.,reservoir regulation, irrigation, and groundwater exploitation), are also critical factors directly affecting regional or local FSC, where the analysis of LAI provides a good example. The capability to comprehend such anthropogenic pathways would in turn influence many aspects of hydrology and agriculture such as the water cycle, crop yield, and so on. Therefore, separating the influence of human activities on the changes in FSC is worthy of comprehensive research.

    Acknowledgements. This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (2018YFA0606002), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41875105), and the Startup Foundation for Introducing Talent of NUIST(2018r078). The CRUNCEP forcing data are available on the UCAR website (https://svn-ccsm-inputdata.cgd.ucar.edu/trunk/inputdata/atm/datm7/). The GPCC precipitation datasets are available at https://www.dwd.de/EN/ourservices/gpcc/gpcc.html and the PREC datasets are available at ftp://ftp.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/precip/50yr/land_ocean/. The CLM5 is available at CESM website (http://www.cesm.ucar.edu/models/cesm2/). The GRACE data can be downloaded from NASA website (https://grace.jpl.nasa.gov/).

    悠悠久久av| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 视频区图区小说| 日韩欧美在线二视频 | 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 大码成人一级视频| 岛国在线观看网站| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 亚洲精品中文字幕一二三四区| 极品人妻少妇av视频| 91老司机精品| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 亚洲 国产 在线| www.999成人在线观看| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| av网站在线播放免费| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 精品久久久久久,| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 男人操女人黄网站| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添小说| 不卡一级毛片| 久久久水蜜桃国产精品网| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 午夜免费鲁丝| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| 99国产精品免费福利视频| cao死你这个sao货| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 一级a爱片免费观看的视频| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 精品福利观看| 91老司机精品| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 婷婷成人精品国产| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 成人手机av| 欧美大码av| 久久国产精品影院| 人妻一区二区av| a级毛片在线看网站| 成人三级做爰电影| 国产精品免费视频内射| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 一级片'在线观看视频| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| tube8黄色片| 久久中文字幕一级| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出 | 制服人妻中文乱码| 999精品在线视频| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 热99re8久久精品国产| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 无人区码免费观看不卡| 亚洲国产欧美网| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 久久香蕉激情| 久久热在线av| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 国产精品久久久人人做人人爽| 日韩欧美三级三区| 国产精品二区激情视频| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| av视频免费观看在线观看| 久热这里只有精品99| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 亚洲中文av在线| 亚洲av熟女| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | 国产高清videossex| 99热国产这里只有精品6| 亚洲一卡2卡3卡4卡5卡精品中文| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 免费不卡黄色视频| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 精品久久久久久久久久免费视频 | 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 欧美大码av| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| av欧美777| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 在线看a的网站| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕 | 在线看a的网站| svipshipincom国产片| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 久热这里只有精品99| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看| 久久青草综合色| 日韩欧美国产一区二区入口| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 午夜免费鲁丝| 国产成人系列免费观看| 国产精品成人在线| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看 | 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 人成视频在线观看免费观看| 看片在线看免费视频| 免费看a级黄色片| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 成人18禁在线播放| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 色94色欧美一区二区| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx| 少妇 在线观看| 久久久水蜜桃国产精品网| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 久久香蕉国产精品| 黑人猛操日本美女一级片| 不卡一级毛片| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 日韩成人在线观看一区二区三区| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 嫩草影视91久久| а√天堂www在线а√下载 | 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 精品一区二区三区视频在线观看免费 | 精品久久久久久,| 人成视频在线观看免费观看| 亚洲成人手机| 国产精品久久久人人做人人爽| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 精品国产国语对白av| 在线视频色国产色| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院 | 91在线观看av| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 日韩有码中文字幕| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 亚洲av美国av| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 国产欧美亚洲国产| 伦理电影免费视频| 91成人精品电影| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月 | 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| av网站免费在线观看视频| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 午夜精品在线福利| 激情在线观看视频在线高清 | 国产亚洲精品一区二区www | 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 一区二区三区激情视频| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 多毛熟女@视频| 91字幕亚洲| 大型av网站在线播放| 高潮久久久久久久久久久不卡| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 美女国产高潮福利片在线看| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 黄片播放在线免费| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 99热网站在线观看| 久久婷婷成人综合色麻豆| 一夜夜www| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 久久久国产成人免费| av不卡在线播放| 午夜福利,免费看| 久久久久视频综合| www.自偷自拍.com| 一区在线观看完整版| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 日韩欧美在线二视频 | 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放 | 村上凉子中文字幕在线| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影 | 日韩欧美三级三区| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 亚洲第一av免费看| 午夜老司机福利片| 亚洲精品国产区一区二| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 男女免费视频国产| 国产在视频线精品| 色94色欧美一区二区| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 下体分泌物呈黄色| 香蕉丝袜av| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人 | 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 超碰97精品在线观看| 69av精品久久久久久| 啦啦啦视频在线资源免费观看| 丰满的人妻完整版| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 国产成人精品无人区| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添小说| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃| av福利片在线| 久久香蕉精品热| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 性少妇av在线| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 在线天堂中文资源库| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 国产又爽黄色视频| 国产成人欧美在线观看 | 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 国产野战对白在线观看| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 久久婷婷成人综合色麻豆| 国产精品久久视频播放| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 欧美日韩黄片免| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 国产激情欧美一区二区| 在线免费观看的www视频| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 性少妇av在线| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 精品高清国产在线一区| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 国内久久婷婷六月综合欲色啪| 欧美精品高潮呻吟av久久| 日韩有码中文字幕| 精品电影一区二区在线| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 黄色 视频免费看| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 一级黄色大片毛片| 国产精品 国内视频| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 亚洲国产欧美网| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 久久久久久久午夜电影 | 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费 | 免费在线观看完整版高清| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 国产精品影院久久| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 男人操女人黄网站| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| videosex国产| 中文字幕高清在线视频| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 夜夜躁狠狠躁天天躁| 日韩欧美三级三区| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区 | 欧美中文综合在线视频| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 视频区图区小说| 日韩免费av在线播放| 一区在线观看完整版| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 亚洲人成电影观看| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 超色免费av| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 亚洲精品在线美女| 国产av又大| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 中文欧美无线码| 亚洲精品在线美女| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 日韩免费av在线播放| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 99久久国产精品久久久| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 免费在线观看亚洲国产| 精品亚洲成国产av| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 日韩成人在线观看一区二区三区| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频| 精品亚洲成国产av| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 久热这里只有精品99| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 国产午夜精品久久久久久| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出 | 18禁观看日本| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| 操美女的视频在线观看| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看 | 国产97色在线日韩免费| 不卡一级毛片| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 久久狼人影院| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 看免费av毛片| 99re在线观看精品视频| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲 | 91精品国产国语对白视频| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 色94色欧美一区二区| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 国产成人影院久久av| 香蕉久久夜色| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 黄片大片在线免费观看| 欧美性长视频在线观看| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 久久青草综合色| 精品亚洲成国产av| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 露出奶头的视频| 午夜免费鲁丝| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 电影成人av| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 香蕉国产在线看| 精品电影一区二区在线| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色 | 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 日韩欧美三级三区| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 亚洲av成人av| 免费观看精品视频网站| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站 | 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 国产单亲对白刺激| 1024香蕉在线观看| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频 | 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 久久99一区二区三区| 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 午夜影院日韩av| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| 黄片小视频在线播放| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 岛国在线观看网站| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 亚洲综合色网址| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 看片在线看免费视频| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清 | 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| 久久青草综合色| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 国产乱人伦免费视频| 香蕉国产在线看| 精品人妻1区二区| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 一区二区三区国产精品乱码| 视频区图区小说| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 国产精品永久免费网站| 五月开心婷婷网| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| 麻豆av在线久日| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| 国产单亲对白刺激| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产 | 日韩制服丝袜自拍偷拍| 91麻豆av在线| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 满18在线观看网站| 亚洲精品国产区一区二| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 欧美午夜高清在线| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 国产真人三级小视频在线观看| 国产高清国产精品国产三级| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 1024视频免费在线观看| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 午夜成年电影在线免费观看| av有码第一页| 亚洲色图av天堂| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 搡老乐熟女国产| 露出奶头的视频| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 精品视频人人做人人爽| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| av片东京热男人的天堂| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 亚洲国产欧美网| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 大型黄色视频在线免费观看| www.精华液| av有码第一页| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| 在线观看日韩欧美| 国产不卡一卡二| 国产精品电影一区二区三区 | 在线观看www视频免费| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| av视频免费观看在线观看| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频 | 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 天天躁日日躁夜夜躁夜夜| 亚洲人成电影观看| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 人人澡人人妻人| 久久中文字幕一级| 久久久久久免费高清国产稀缺| 国产成人av教育| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| av网站免费在线观看视频| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 黑人猛操日本美女一级片| 国产成人精品在线电影| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 精品国产一区二区久久| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 精品久久久精品久久久| 久久九九热精品免费| 丁香欧美五月| 窝窝影院91人妻| 69av精品久久久久久| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 欧美成狂野欧美在线观看| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 9色porny在线观看| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 国产精品 国内视频| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 超色免费av| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 国产野战对白在线观看| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 国产精品久久久人人做人人爽| 9色porny在线观看| 亚洲中文av在线| 高清欧美精品videossex| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 曰老女人黄片| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站 | 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 91成年电影在线观看| av电影中文网址| 国产精品 国内视频| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 99久久国产精品久久久| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 日韩欧美在线二视频 | 91老司机精品| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 91大片在线观看| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 亚洲全国av大片| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 亚洲全国av大片| 最新美女视频免费是黄的| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费 | 国产精品成人在线| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免费看| 热re99久久国产66热| 黄片大片在线免费观看| 精品一区二区三卡| 精品国产国语对白av| 后天国语完整版免费观看| av欧美777| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www | 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 热re99久久国产66热| 中文欧美无线码| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 国产亚洲精品一区二区www | 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 在线观看免费高清a一片| 超色免费av| avwww免费| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 国产精品久久久av美女十八|