• <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/).

    国产精品永久免费网站| 有码 亚洲区| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕 | 美女高潮的动态| 三级国产精品片| 欧美色视频一区免费| 日韩高清综合在线| 能在线免费看毛片的网站| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 国产精品国产三级国产av玫瑰| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合 | 综合色丁香网| 欧美一区二区亚洲| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 有码 亚洲区| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 亚洲18禁久久av| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久 | 国产真实乱freesex| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 一本久久精品| 性插视频无遮挡在线免费观看| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o | 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 91久久精品电影网| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 热99在线观看视频| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 九草在线视频观看| 亚洲成人av在线免费| h日本视频在线播放| 在线a可以看的网站| 国产极品精品免费视频能看的| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说 | 欧美一区二区亚洲| 欧美性猛交╳xxx乱大交人| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 国产精品三级大全| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 舔av片在线| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 我要搜黄色片| 免费大片18禁| 男女视频在线观看网站免费| 亚洲综合精品二区| 欧美色视频一区免费| 青春草国产在线视频| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 国产成人a区在线观看| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 在线播放国产精品三级| 国产久久久一区二区三区| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 色视频www国产| 如何舔出高潮| 成年av动漫网址| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 一级毛片aaaaaa免费看小| 真实男女啪啪啪动态图| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 欧美激情国产日韩精品一区| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看 | 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 国产高潮美女av| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的 | 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 一本久久精品| 国产免费视频播放在线视频 | 水蜜桃什么品种好| 国产中年淑女户外野战色| 热99re8久久精品国产| 成人二区视频| 在线播放国产精品三级| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 岛国毛片在线播放| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 91av网一区二区| 中文欧美无线码| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久 | 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 色综合站精品国产| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 老司机影院成人| 少妇熟女欧美另类| 内地一区二区视频在线| 国产免费又黄又爽又色| 色5月婷婷丁香| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 午夜福利在线在线| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 亚洲av成人av| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 久久久久国产网址| 边亲边吃奶的免费视频| 久久久a久久爽久久v久久| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 国产视频内射| 国产激情偷乱视频一区二区| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 一个人免费在线观看电影| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 禁无遮挡网站| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| videos熟女内射| 久久久久久久久久成人| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲| 久久精品影院6| 男女视频在线观看网站免费| 人妻系列 视频| 久久久久久久久久久丰满| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 三级经典国产精品| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 成人三级黄色视频| 欧美性猛交黑人性爽| 久久午夜福利片| 韩国av在线不卡| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆 | 国产毛片a区久久久久| 日日啪夜夜撸| av免费在线看不卡| 欧美性猛交黑人性爽| videossex国产| 欧美3d第一页| 久久这里有精品视频免费| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| 热99在线观看视频| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 国产真实乱freesex| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片| 亚洲精品乱码久久久久久按摩| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合 | 国产单亲对白刺激| 秋霞伦理黄片| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 两个人的视频大全免费| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 超碰97精品在线观看| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 免费av观看视频| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线 | 国产极品天堂在线| 色吧在线观看| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 午夜视频国产福利| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看 | 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3| 国产探花极品一区二区| 身体一侧抽搐| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲| 噜噜噜噜噜久久久久久91| 久99久视频精品免费| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久 | 成人高潮视频无遮挡免费网站| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 99久久精品热视频| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 欧美zozozo另类| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 日韩欧美三级三区| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 成人二区视频| 国产精品野战在线观看| 精品熟女少妇av免费看| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 久久久久久久久久久丰满| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 日本五十路高清| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 性色avwww在线观看| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 免费av毛片视频| 亚洲精品影视一区二区三区av| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99 | 欧美+日韩+精品| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 能在线免费观看的黄片| 国产成人a区在线观看| 精品熟女少妇av免费看| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 美女内射精品一级片tv| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 免费看光身美女| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久 | 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 精品酒店卫生间| 日本五十路高清| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 成人无遮挡网站| 99久国产av精品| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 免费看av在线观看网站| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 成人欧美大片| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 亚洲av熟女| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 中文字幕免费在线视频6| 欧美人与善性xxx| 2022亚洲国产成人精品| 国产高清国产精品国产三级 | 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 九草在线视频观看| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 级片在线观看| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 热99在线观看视频| 亚洲va在线va天堂va国产| 大又大粗又爽又黄少妇毛片口| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 97在线视频观看| 国产精品一区www在线观看| kizo精华| 只有这里有精品99| 变态另类丝袜制服| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 免费观看精品视频网站| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放 | 久久久国产成人精品二区| 日本熟妇午夜| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 深爱激情五月婷婷| 亚洲久久久久久中文字幕| 小说图片视频综合网站| 久久久久久伊人网av| 在现免费观看毛片| 精品久久久噜噜| 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 国产中年淑女户外野战色| 国产午夜精品论理片| 只有这里有精品99| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 国产成人福利小说| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区 | 久久精品国产亚洲网站| www.av在线官网国产| 国产精品国产三级国产av玫瑰| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 亚洲久久久久久中文字幕| 高清午夜精品一区二区三区| 亚洲av成人av| 久久久久性生活片| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合 | 男女那种视频在线观看| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花 | 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 赤兔流量卡办理| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 黄色欧美视频在线观看| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 两个人视频免费观看高清| av在线老鸭窝| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久 | 欧美人与善性xxx| 精品人妻视频免费看| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 成人三级黄色视频| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区 | 日本黄色片子视频| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 久久久久久大精品| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久 | 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 中文字幕制服av| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 观看免费一级毛片| 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 国内精品宾馆在线| 97超碰精品成人国产| 少妇丰满av| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 老司机影院成人| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区 | 国产高清三级在线| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 99热这里只有精品一区| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 两个人视频免费观看高清| 天堂网av新在线| 免费看a级黄色片| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | av在线蜜桃| 综合色av麻豆| av黄色大香蕉| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 亚洲国产精品专区欧美| 国产美女午夜福利| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 变态另类丝袜制服| 超碰97精品在线观看| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 91av网一区二区| 国产免费视频播放在线视频 | 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 日韩中字成人| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 久久精品夜色国产| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 国产综合懂色| av国产免费在线观看| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| www.av在线官网国产| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品 | 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 岛国在线免费视频观看| kizo精华| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| a级毛色黄片| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站 | 男女视频在线观看网站免费| 特大巨黑吊av在线直播| 国产三级中文精品| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 色综合站精品国产| 99久久成人亚洲精品观看| 黄片无遮挡物在线观看| 国产淫片久久久久久久久| 少妇高潮的动态图| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 91久久精品电影网| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 国产老妇女一区| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 亚洲欧美精品专区久久| 国产成人aa在线观看| 高清午夜精品一区二区三区| av视频在线观看入口| 国产午夜精品论理片| 国产精品三级大全| 十八禁国产超污无遮挡网站| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| a级毛色黄片| ponron亚洲| 国内精品宾馆在线| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 少妇的逼好多水| 国产成人精品一,二区| 精品一区二区免费观看| 国产91av在线免费观看| 22中文网久久字幕| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 精品酒店卫生间| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 美女国产视频在线观看| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看| 成年免费大片在线观看| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 毛片女人毛片| 小说图片视频综合网站| 毛片一级片免费看久久久久| 黄色配什么色好看| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 亚州av有码| 男女那种视频在线观看| 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 99热这里只有精品一区| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 亚洲成人av在线免费| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 国产黄片美女视频| 嫩草影院入口| 亚洲色图av天堂| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 一个人免费在线观看电影| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 高清视频免费观看一区二区 | 综合色av麻豆| 赤兔流量卡办理| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 色5月婷婷丁香| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 一级黄片播放器| 只有这里有精品99| 久久人人爽人人片av| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕 | 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 看免费成人av毛片| 欧美激情在线99| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 六月丁香七月| 三级男女做爰猛烈吃奶摸视频| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| av.在线天堂| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站 | 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 成人一区二区视频在线观看| 精品久久久久久久久av| 小蜜桃在线观看免费完整版高清| 97在线视频观看| 伦精品一区二区三区| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 黄色一级大片看看| 亚洲五月天丁香| 国产老妇女一区| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区 | 看黄色毛片网站| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 一本久久精品| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 22中文网久久字幕| 青春草国产在线视频| 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 精品一区二区免费观看| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| kizo精华| 女人十人毛片免费观看3o分钟| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 高清午夜精品一区二区三区| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 国产三级中文精品| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 直男gayav资源| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 看黄色毛片网站| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 国产免费视频播放在线视频 | 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 午夜爱爱视频在线播放| 日日啪夜夜撸| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 草草在线视频免费看| 国产av一区在线观看免费| 国产成人精品婷婷| 91精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 久久精品91蜜桃| 午夜爱爱视频在线播放| 日本与韩国留学比较| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 七月丁香在线播放| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 偷拍熟女少妇极品色| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 国产精品久久视频播放| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| av播播在线观看一区| av线在线观看网站| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 国产免费视频播放在线视频 | 日本-黄色视频高清免费观看|