Articles | Volume 18, issue 20
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-7707-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-7707-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Model evaluation paper
| 
23 Oct 2025
Model evaluation paper |
| 23 Oct 2025
| 23 Oct 2025
Soil parameterization in land surface models drives large discrepancies in soil moisture predictions across hydrologically complex regions of the contiguous United States
Kachinga Silwimba
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Department of Geosciences, Boise State University, Boise, ID, USA
Alejandro N. Flores
Department of Geosciences, Boise State University, Boise, ID, USA
Irene Cionni
Department of Geosciences, Boise State University, Boise, ID, USA
Sharon A. Billings
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and Kansas Biological Survey, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA
Center for Ecological Research, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA
Pamela L. Sullivan
College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
Hoori Ajami
Department of Environmental Sciences, University of California, Riverside, CA, USA
Daniel R. Hirmas
Department of Plant and Soil Science, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA
Related authors
No articles found.
Rainey Aberle, Ellyn Enderlin, Shad O'Neel, Caitlyn Florentine, Louis Sass, Adam Dickson, Hans-Peter Marshall, and Alejandro Flores
The Cryosphere, 19, 1675–1693, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-1675-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-1675-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Tracking seasonal snow on glaciers is critical for understanding glacier health. Yet previous work has not directly compared machine learning algorithms for snow classification across satellite image products. To address this, we developed a new automated workflow for tracking seasonal snow on glaciers using several image products and machine learning models. Applying this method can help provide insights into glacier health, water resources, and the effects of climate change on snow cover.
James Stegen, Amy J. Burgin, Michelle H. Busch, Joshua B. Fisher, Joshua Ladau, Jenna Abrahamson, Lauren Kinsman-Costello, Li Li, Xingyuan Chen, Thibault Datry, Nate McDowell, Corianne Tatariw, Anna Braswell, Jillian M. Deines, Julia A. Guimond, Peter Regier, Kenton Rod, Edward K. P. Bam, Etienne Fluet-Chouinard, Inke Forbrich, Kristin L. Jaeger, Teri O'Meara, Tim Scheibe, Erin Seybold, Jon N. Sweetman, Jianqiu Zheng, Daniel C. Allen, Elizabeth Herndon, Beth A. Middleton, Scott Painter, Kevin Roche, Julianne Scamardo, Ross Vander Vorste, Kristin Boye, Ellen Wohl, Margaret Zimmer, Kelly Hondula, Maggi Laan, Anna Marshall, and Kaizad F. Patel
Biogeosciences, 22, 995–1034, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-995-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-22-995-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The loss and gain of surface water (variable inundation) are common processes across Earth. Global change shifts variable inundation dynamics, highlighting a need for unified understanding that transcends individual variably inundated ecosystems (VIEs). We review the literature, highlight challenges, and emphasize opportunities to generate transferable knowledge by viewing VIEs through a common lens. We aim to inspire the emergence of a cross-VIE community based on a proposed continuum approach.
Lena Wang, Sharon Billings, Li Li, Daniel Hirmas, Keira Johnson, Devon Kerins, Julio Pachon, Curtis Beutler, Karla Jarecke, Vaishnavi Varikuti, Micah Unruh, Hoori Ajami, Holly Barnard, Alejandro Flores, Kenneth Williams, and Pamela Sullivan
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-70, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-70, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our study looked at how different forest types and conditions affected soil microbes, and soil carbon and stability. Aspen organic matter led to higher microbial activity, smaller soil aggregates, and more stable soil carbon, possibly reducing dissolved organic carbon movement from hillslopes to streams. This shows the importance of models like the Microbial Efficiency – Matrix Stabilization framework for predicting CO2 release, soil carbon stability, and carbon movement.
Zewei Ma, Kaiyu Guan, Bin Peng, Wang Zhou, Robert Grant, Jinyun Tang, Murugesu Sivapalan, Ming Pan, Li Li, and Zhenong Jin
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-340, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-340, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for HESS
Short summary
Short summary
We explore tile drainage’ impacts on the integrated hydrology-biogeochemistry-plant system, using ecosys with soil oxygen and microbe dynamics. We found that tile drainage lowers soil water content and improves soil oxygen levels, which helps crops grow better, especially during wet springs, and the developed root system also helps mitigate drought stress on dry summers. Overall, tile drainage increases crop resilience to climate change, making it a valuable future agricultural practice.
Tobias Karl David Weber, Lutz Weihermüller, Attila Nemes, Michel Bechtold, Aurore Degré, Efstathios Diamantopoulos, Simone Fatichi, Vilim Filipović, Surya Gupta, Tobias L. Hohenbrink, Daniel R. Hirmas, Conrad Jackisch, Quirijn de Jong van Lier, John Koestel, Peter Lehmann, Toby R. Marthews, Budiman Minasny, Holger Pagel, Martine van der Ploeg, Shahab Aldin Shojaeezadeh, Simon Fiil Svane, Brigitta Szabó, Harry Vereecken, Anne Verhoef, Michael Young, Yijian Zeng, Yonggen Zhang, and Sara Bonetti
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 3391–3433, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-3391-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-3391-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Pedotransfer functions (PTFs) are used to predict parameters of models describing the hydraulic properties of soils. The appropriateness of these predictions critically relies on the nature of the datasets for training the PTFs and the physical comprehensiveness of the models. This roadmap paper is addressed to PTF developers and users and critically reflects the utility and future of PTFs. To this end, we present a manifesto aiming at a paradigm shift in PTF research.
Gary Sterle, Julia Perdrial, Dustin W. Kincaid, Kristen L. Underwood, Donna M. Rizzo, Ijaz Ul Haq, Li Li, Byung Suk Lee, Thomas Adler, Hang Wen, Helena Middleton, and Adrian A. Harpold
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 611–630, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-611-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-611-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We develop stream water chemistry to pair with the existing CAMELS (Catchment Attributes and Meteorology for Large-sample Studies) dataset. The newly developed dataset, termed CAMELS-Chem, includes common stream water chemistry constituents and wet deposition chemistry in 516 catchments. Examples show the value of CAMELS-Chem to trend and spatial analyses, as well as its limitations in sampling length and consistency.
Chao Wang, Stephen Leisz, Li Li, Xiaoying Shi, Jiafu Mao, Yi Zheng, and Anping Chen
Earth Syst. Dynam., 15, 75–90, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-75-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-15-75-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Climate change can significantly impact river runoff; however, predicting future runoff is challenging. Using historical runoff gauge data to evaluate model performances in runoff simulations for the Mekong River, we quantify future runoff changes in the Mekong River with the best simulation combination. Results suggest a significant increase in the annual runoff, along with varied seasonal distributions, thus heightening the need for adapted water resource management measures.
William Rudisill, Alejandro Flores, and Rosemary Carroll
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 6531–6552, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6531-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-6531-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
It is important to know how well atmospheric models do in mountains, but there are not very many weather stations. We evaluate rain and snow from a model from 1987–2020 in the Upper Colorado River basin against the available data. The model works rather well, but there are still some uncertainties in remote locations. We then use snow maps collected by aircraft, streamflow measurements, and some advanced statistics to help identify how well the model works in ways we could not do before.
Adam P. Schreiner-McGraw and Hoori Ajami
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 1145–1164, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-1145-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-1145-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We assess the impact of uncertainty in measurements of precipitation and air temperature on simulated groundwater processes in a mountainous watershed. We illustrate the role of topography in controlling how uncertainty in the input datasets propagates through the soil and into the groundwater. While the focus of previous investigations has been on the impact of precipitation uncertainty, we show that air temperature uncertainty is equally important in controlling the groundwater recharge.
Wei Zhi, Yuning Shi, Hang Wen, Leila Saberi, Gene-Hua Crystal Ng, Kayalvizhi Sadayappan, Devon Kerins, Bryn Stewart, and Li Li
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 315–333, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-315-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-315-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Watersheds are the fundamental Earth surface functioning unit that connects the land to aquatic systems. Here we present the recently developed BioRT-Flux-PIHM v1.0, a watershed-scale biogeochemical reactive transport model, to improve our ability to understand and predict solute export and water quality. The model has been verified against the benchmark code CrunchTope and has recently been applied to understand reactive transport processes in multiple watersheds of different conditions.
Karun Pandit, Hamid Dashti, Andrew T. Hudak, Nancy F. Glenn, Alejandro N. Flores, and Douglas J. Shinneman
Biogeosciences, 18, 2027–2045, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-2027-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-2027-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
A dynamic global vegetation model, Ecosystem Demography (EDv2.2), is used to understand spatiotemporal dynamics of a semi-arid shrub ecosystem under alternative fire regimes. Multi-decadal point simulations suggest shrub dominance for a non-fire scenario and a contrasting phase of shrub and C3 grass growth for a fire scenario. Regional gross primary productivity (GPP) simulations indicate moderate agreement with MODIS GPP and a GPP reduction in fire-affected areas before showing some recovery.
Hang Wen, Pamela L. Sullivan, Gwendolyn L. Macpherson, Sharon A. Billings, and Li Li
Biogeosciences, 18, 55–75, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-55-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-55-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Carbonate weathering is essential in regulating carbon cycle at the century timescale. Plant roots accelerate weathering by elevating soil CO2 via respiration. It however remains poorly understood how and how much rooting characteristics modify flow paths and weathering. This work indicates that deepening roots in woodlands can enhance carbonate weathering by promoting recharge and CO2–carbonate contact in the deep, carbonate-abundant subsurface.
Cited articles
Basara, J. B. and Christian, J. I.: Seasonal and interannual variability of land–atmosphere coupling across the southern Great Plains of North America using the North American regional reanalysis, Int. J. Climatol., 38, 964–978, 2018. a
Berg, A. and Sheffield, J.: Soil moisture–evapotranspiration coupling in CMIP5 models: Relationship with simulated climate and projections, J. Climate, 31, 4865–4878, 2018. a
Brimelow, J. C., Hanesiak, J. M., and Raddatz, R.: Validation of soil moisture simulations from the PAMII model, and an assessment of their sensitivity to uncertainties in soil hydraulic parameters, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 150, 100–114, 2010. a
Brocca, L., Ciabatta, L., Massari, C., Camici, S., and Tarpanelli, A.: Soil moisture for hydrological applications: Open questions and new opportunities, Water, 9, 140, 2017. a
Caplan, J. S., Giménez, D., Hirmas, D. R., Brunsell, N. A., Blair, J. M., and Knapp, A. K.: Decadal-scale shifts in soil hydraulic properties as induced by altered precipitation, Sci. Adv., 5, eaau6635, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau6635, 2019. a
Chatterjee, S., Desai, A. R., Zhu, J., Townsend, P. A., and Huang, J.: Soil moisture as an essential component for delineating and forecasting agricultural rather than meteorological drought, Remote Sens. Environ., 269, 112833, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2021.112833, 2022. a
Cosby, B., Hornberger, G., Clapp, R., and Ginn, T.: A statistical exploration of the relationships of soil moisture characteristics to the physical properties of soils, Water Resour. Res., 20, 682–690, 1984. a
Dagon, K., Sanderson, B. M., Fisher, R. A., and Lawrence, D. M.: A machine learning approach to emulation and biophysical parameter estimation with the Community Land Model, version 5, Adv. Stat. Climatol. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 6, 223–244, 2020. a
Dai, Y., Xin, Q., Wei, N., Zhang, Y., Shangguan, W., Yuan, H., Zhang, S., Liu, S., and Lu, X.: A global high-resolution data set of soil hydraulic and thermal properties for land surface modeling, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 11, 2996–3023, 2019. a
da Silva, L. d. C. M., Amorim, R. S. S., Fernandes Filho, E. I., Bocuti, E. D., and da Silva, D. D.: Pedotransfer functions and machine learning: Advancements and challenges in tropical soils, Geoderma Reg., 35, e00720, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geodrs.2023.e00720, 2023. a
Dawson, A.: eofs: A library for EOF analysis of meteorological, oceanographic, and climate data, J. Open Res. Softw., 4, https://doi.org/10.5334/jors.122, 2016. a, b, c
Elmore, K. L. and Richman, M. B.: Euclidean distance as a similarity metric for principal component analysis, Mon. Weather Rev., 129, 540–549, 2001. a
Feki, M., Ravazzani, G., Ceppi, A., and Mancini, M.: Influence of soil hydraulic variability on soil moisture simulations and irrigation scheduling in a maize field, Agr. Water Manage., 202, 183–194, 2018. a
Fu, X., Jiang, X., Yu, Z., Ding, Y., Lü, H., and Zheng, D.: Understanding the key factors that influence soil moisture estimation using the unscented weighted ensemble Kalman filter, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 313, 108745, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2021.108745, 2022. a
Gimeno, L., Drumond, A., Nieto, R., Trigo, R. M., and Stohl, A.: On the origin of continental precipitation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043712, 2010. a, b, c, d
Godoy, V. A., Zuquette, L. V., and Gómez-Hernández, J. J.: Scale effect on hydraulic conductivity and solute transport: Small and large-scale laboratory experiments and field experiments, Eng. Geol., 243, 196–205, 2018. a
Guimberteau, M., Ciais, P., Ducharne, A., Boisier, J. P., Dutra Aguiar, A. P., Biemans, H., De Deurwaerder, H., Galbraith, D., Kruijt, B., Langerwisch, F., Poveda, G., Rammig, A., Rodriguez, D. A., Tejada, G., Thonicke, K., Von Randow, C., Von Randow, R. C. S., Zhang, K., and Verbeeck, H.: Impacts of future deforestation and climate change on the hydrology of the Amazon Basin: a multi-model analysis with a new set of land-cover change scenarios, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 1455–1475, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-1455-2017, 2017. a
Hagemann, S., Chen, C., Clark, D. B., Folwell, S., Gosling, S. N., Haddeland, I., Hanasaki, N., Heinke, J., Ludwig, F., Voss, F., and Wiltshire, A. J.: Climate change impact on available water resources obtained using multiple global climate and hydrology models, Earth Syst. Dynam., 4, 129–144, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-4-129-2013, 2013. a
Hauser, E., Sullivan, P. L., Flores, A. N., Hirmas, D., and Billings, S. A.: Global-Scale Shifts in Rooting Depths Due To Anthropocene Land Cover Changes Pose Unexamined Consequences for Critical Zone Functioning, Earth's Future, 10, e2022EF002897, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022EF002897, 2022. a
Haverkamp, R., Leij, F. J., Fuentes, C., Sciortino, A., and Ross, P.: Soil water retention: I. Introduction of a shape index, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 69, 1881–1890, 2005. a
Hengl, T., De Jesus, J. M., MacMillan, R. A., Batjes, N. H., Heuvelink, G. B. M., Ribeiro, E., Samuel-Rosa, A., Kempen, B., Leenaars, J. G. B., Walsh, M. G., and Ruiperez Gonzalez, M.: SoilGrids1km – global soil information based on automated mapping, PloS one, 9, e105992, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105992, 2014. a
Hirmas, D. R., Giménez, D., Nemes, A., Kerry, R., Brunsell, N. A., and Wilson, C. J.: Climate-induced changes in continental-scale soil macroporosity may intensify water cycle, Nature, 561, 100–103, 2018. a
Ji, P., Yuan, X., and Jiao, Y.: Synergistic Effects of High-Resolution Factors for Improving Soil Moisture Simulations Over China, Water Resour. Res., 59, e2023WR035513, https://doi.org/10.1029/2023WR035513, 2023. a
Jimma, T. B., Demissie, T., Diro, G. T., Ture, K., Terefe, T., and Solomon, D.: Spatiotemporal variability of soil moisture over Ethiopia and its teleconnections with remote and local drivers, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 151, 1911–1929, 2023. a
Jollife, I.: Principal component analysis, in: 2nd Edn., Springer, New York, https://doi.org/10.1007/b98835, 2002. a
Kang, H.-S. and Hong, S.-Y.: An assessment of the land surface parameters on the simulated regional climate circulations: The 1997 and 1998 east Asian summer monsoon cases, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD009499, 2008. a
Kato, H., Rodell, M., Beyrich, F., Cleugh, H., van GORSEL, E., Liu, H., and Meyers, T. P.: Sensitivity of land surface simulations to model physics, land characteristics, and forcings, at four CEOP sites, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn. Ser. II, 85, 187–204, 2007. a
Koop, A. N., Hirmas, D. R., Billings, S. A., Li, L., Cueva, A., Zhang, X., Wen, H., Nemes, A., Souza, L. F. T., Ajami, H., Flores, A. N., Rudick, A. K., Guthrie, A., Klamm, L. M., Unruh, M., and Sullivan, P. L.: Is macroporosity controlled by complexed clay and soil organic carbon?, Geoderma, 437, 116565, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2023.116565, 2023. a
Korres, W., Koyama, C. N., Fiener, P., and Schneider, K.: Analysis of surface soil moisture patterns in agricultural landscapes using Empirical Orthogonal Functions, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 14, 751–764, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-14-751-2010, 2010. a
Koster, R. D., Guo, Z., Yang, R., Dirmeyer, P. A., Mitchell, K., and Puma, M. J.: On the nature of soil moisture in land surface models, J. Climate, 22, 4322–4335, 2009. a
Koukoula, M., Schwartz, C., Nikolopoulos, E., and Anagnostou, E.: Understanding the impact of soil moisture on precipitation under different climate and meteorological conditions: a numerical sensitivity study over the CONUS, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2021JD035096, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JD035096, 2021. a
Kuss, A. J. M. and Gurdak, J. J.: Groundwater level response in US principal aquifers to ENSO, NAO, PDO, and AMO, J. Hydrology, 519, 1939–1952, 2014. a
Lai, J. and Ren, L.: Estimation of effective hydraulic parameters in heterogeneous soils at field scale, Geoderma, 264, 28–41, 2016. a
Lavers, D. A., Simmons, A., Vamborg, F., and Rodwell, M. J.: An evaluation of ERA5 precipitation for climate monitoring, Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 148, 3152–3165, 2022. a
Lawrence, D. M., Fisher, R. A., Koven, C. D., Oleson, K. W., Swenson, S. C., Bonan, G., Collier, N., Ghimire, B., van Kampenhout, L., Kennedy, D., Kluzek, E., Lawrence, P. J., Li, F., Li, H., Lombardozzi, D., Riley, W. J., Sacks, W. J., Shi, M., Vertenstein, M., Wieder, W. R., Xu, C., Ali, A. A., Badger, A. M., Bisht, G., van den Broeke, M., Brunke, M. A., Burns, S. P., Buzan, J., Clark, M., Craig, A., Dahlin, K., Drewniak, B., Fisher, J. B., Flanner, M., Fox, A. M., Gentine, P., Hoffman, F., Keppel-Aleks, G., Knox, R., Kumar, S., Lenaerts, J., Leung, L. R., Lipscomb, W. H., Lu, Y., Pandey, A., Pelletier, J. D., Perket, J., Randerson, J. T., Ricciuto, D. M., Sanderson, B. M., Slater, A., Subin, Z. M., Tang, J., Thomas, R. Q., Val Martin, M., and Zeng, X.: The Community Land Model version 5: Description of new features, benchmarking, and impact of forcing uncertainty, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 11, 4245–4287, 2019. a, b, c
Lesinger, K. and Tian, D.: Trends, variability, and drivers of flash droughts in the contiguous United States, Water Resour. Res., 58, e2022WR032186, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022WR032186, 2022. a, b
Li, J., Duan, Q. Y., Gong, W., Ye, A., Dai, Y., Miao, C., Di, Z., Tong, C., and Sun, Y.: Assessing parameter importance of the Common Land Model based on qualitative and quantitative sensitivity analysis, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 3279–3293, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3279-2013, 2013. a
Linz, P. and Wang, R.: Exploring numerical methods: An introduction to scientific computing using MATLAB, Jones & Bartlett Learning, https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Af9B4txueV0C&oi=fnd&pg=PA7&dq=Exploring+Numerical+Methods:+An+Introduction+to+Scientific+Computing+Using+MATLAB&ots=5FQ3zFIBtP&sig=llBj_ld0BPM2iYWfQMnquHOa6bM (last access: 16 April 2024), 2003. a
Lorenz, E. N.: Empirical orthogonal functions and statistical weather prediction, in: vol. 1, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Meteorology, Cambridge, https://wind.mit.edu/~emanuel/Lorenz/EdLorenz/Empirical_Orthogonal_Functions_1956.pdf (last access: 17 October 2024), 1956. a
Martens, B., Miralles, D. G., Lievens, H., van der Schalie, R., de Jeu, R. A. M., Fernández-Prieto, D., Beck, H. E., Dorigo, W. A., and Verhoest, N. E. C.: GLEAM v3: satellite-based land evaporation and root-zone soil moisture, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1903–1925, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1903-2017, 2017. a
McDonough, K. R., Hutchinson, S. L., and Hutchinson, S.: Declining Soil Moisture Threatens Water Availability in the US Great Plains, T. ASABE, 63, 1147–1156, 2020. a
McNeill, S., Lilburne, L., Carrick, S., Webb, T., and Cuthill, T.: Pedotransfer functions for the soil water characteristics of New Zealand soils using S-map information, Geoderma, 326, 96–110, 2018. a
Melillo, J. M., Richmond, T. C., and Yohe, G. W. (Eds.): Climate change impacts in the United States, Third national climate assessment, U.S. Global Change Research Program, 52, 150–174, 2014. a
Muñoz-Sabater, J., Dutra, E., Agustí-Panareda, A., Albergel, C., Arduini, G., Balsamo, G., Boussetta, S., Choulga, M., Harrigan, S., Hersbach, H., Martens, B., Miralles, D. G., Piles, M., Rodríguez-Fernández, N. J., Zsoter, E., Buontempo, C., and Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5-Land: a state-of-the-art global reanalysis dataset for land applications, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4349–4383, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4349-2021, 2021. a, b, c
Muñoz Sabater, J., Comyn-Platt, E., Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Muñoz Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., Thépaut, J.-N., Cagnazo, C., and Cucchi, M.: ERA5-land post-processed daily-statistics from 1950 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.e9c9c792, 2024. a
Oleson, K. W., Lawrence, D. M., Bonan, G. B., Flanner, M. G., Kluzek, E., Lawrence, P. J., Levis, S., Swenson, S. C., Thornton, P. E., Dai, A., Decker, M., Dickinson, R., Feddema, J., Heald, C. L., Hoffman, F., Lamarque, J.-F., Mahowald, N., Niu, G.-Y., Qian, T., Randerson, J., Running, S., Sakaguchi, K., Slater, A., Stockli, R., Wang, A., Yang, Z.-L., Zeng, X., and Zeng X.: Technical description of version 4.0 of the Community Land Model (CLM), NCAR Technical Note NCAR/TN-478+STR, NCAR, 257 pp., https://doi.org/10.5065/D6FB50WZ, 2010. a, b
Orth, R. and Seneviratne, S. I.: Analysis of soil moisture memory from observations in Europe, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 117, D15, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD017366, 2012. a
Perry, M. A. and Niemann, J. D.: Analysis and estimation of soil moisture at the catchment scale using EOFs, J. Hydrol., 334, 388–404, 2007. a
Qiao, L., Zuo, Z., and Xiao, D.: Evaluation of soil moisture in CMIP6 simulations, J. Climate, 35, 779–800, 2022. a
Reichle, R. H., Koster, R. D., Dong, J., and Berg, A. A.: Global soil moisture from satellite observations, land surface models, and ground data: Implications for data assimilation, J. Hydrometeorol., 5, 430–442, 2004. a
Reichle, R. H., Draper, C. S., Liu, Q., Girotto, M., Mahanama, S. P., Koster, R. D., and De Lannoy, G. J.: Assessment of MERRA-2 land surface hydrology estimates, J. Climate, 30, 2937–2960, 2017. a
Sanchez-Murillo, R., González-Hita, L., Mejía-González, M. A., Carteño-Martinez, B., Aparicio-González, J. C., Mañón-Flores, D., Ortega, L., Stojanovic, M., Nieto, R., and Gimeno, L.: Tracing isotope precipitation patterns across Mexico, PLOS Water, 2, e0000136, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000136, 2023. a
Schaap, M. G., Leij, F. J., and Van Genuchten, M. T.: Neural network analysis for hierarchical prediction of soil hydraulic properties, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 62, 847–855, 1998. a
Silwimba, K.: kachingasilwimba/spmip-eof-analysis: CLM5 SPMIP EOF Analysis Toolkit, Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14888812, 2025a. a
Silwimba, K.: Soil Moisture Data Subset from the Community Land Model Version 5 (CLM5) for the Soil Parameter Model Intercomparison Project (SP-MIP) over the Continental United States (CONUS), 1980–2010, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15078448, 2025b. a
Sullivan, P. L., Billings, S. A., Hirmas, D., Li, L., Zhang, X., Ziegler, S., Murenbeeld, K., Ajami, H., Guthrie, A., Singha, K., Giménez, D., Duro, A., Moreno, V., Flores, A., Cueva, A., Koop, Aronson, E. L., Barnard, H. R., Banwart, S. A., Keen, R. M., Nemes, A., Nikolaidis, N. P., Nippert, J. B., Richter, D., Robinson, D. A., Sadayappan, K., de Souza, L. F. T., Unruh, M., and Wen, H.: Embracing the dynamic nature of soil structure: A paradigm illuminating the role of life in critical zones of the Anthropocene, Earth-Sci. Rev., 225, 103873, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103873, 2022. a
Tafasca, S., Ducharne, A., and Valentin, C.: Weak sensitivity of the terrestrial water budget to global soil texture maps in the ORCHIDEE land surface model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3753–3774, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-3753-2020, 2020. a
Tang, L. I. and McColl, K. A.: An Observational, Irrigation-Sensitive Agricultural Drought Record from Weather Data, J. Hydrometeorol., 24, 2091–2103, 2023. a
Taylor, K. E.: Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single diagram, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 106, 7183–7192, 2001. a
Thornton, E.: Technical Description of version 4.0 of the Community Land Model (CLM), NCAR, Climate and Global, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Guo-Yue-Niu/publication/ (last access: 17 February 2024), 2010. a
Tobin, K. J., Crow, W. T., Dong, J., and Bennett, M. E.: Validation of a new root-zone soil moisture product: Soil MERGE, IEEE J. Select. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens., 12, 3351–3365, 2019. a
van den Hurk, B., Kim, H., Krinner, G., Seneviratne, S. I., Derksen, C., Oki, T., Douville, H., Colin, J., Ducharne, A., Cheruy, F., Viovy, N., Puma, M. J., Wada, Y., Li, W., Jia, B., Alessandri, A., Lawrence, D. M., Weedon, G. P., Ellis, R., Hagemann, S., Mao, J., Flanner, M. G., Zampieri, M., Materia, S., Law, R. M., and Sheffield, J.: LS3MIP (v1.0) contribution to CMIP6: the Land Surface, Snow and Soil moisture Model Intercomparison Project – aims, setup and expected outcome, Geosci. Model Dev., 9, 2809–2832, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-2809-2016, 2016. a
Van Looy, K., Bouma, J., Herbst, M., Koestel, J., Minasny, B., Mishra, U., Montzka, C., Nemes, A., Pachepsky, Y. A., Padarian, J., Schaap, M. G., Tóth, B., Verhoef, A., Vanderborght, J., van der Ploeg, M. J., Weihermüller, L., Zacharias, S., Zhang, Y., and Vereecken, H.: Pedotransfer functions in Earth system science: Challenges and perspectives, Rev. Geophys., 55, 1199–1256, 2017. a
Vereecken, H., Weynants, M., Javaux, M., Pachepsky, Y., Schaap, M., and v. Genuchten, M. T.: Using pedotransfer functions to estimate the van Genuchten–Mualem soil hydraulic properties: A review, Vadose Zone J., 9, 795–820, 2010. a
Weber, T. K., Finkel, M., da Conceção Gonçalves, M., Vereecken, H., and Diamantopoulos, E.: Pedotransfer function for the Brunswick soil hydraulic property model and comparison to the van Genuchten–Mualem model, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2019WR026820, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026820, 2020. a
Wipfler, E. L., Metselaar, K., van Dam, J. C., Feddes, R. A., van Meijgaard, E., van Ulft, L. H., van den Hurk, B., Zwart, S. J., and Bastiaanssen, W. G. M.: Seasonal evaluation of the land surface scheme HTESSEL against remote sensing derived energy fluxes of the Transdanubian region in Hungary, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 1257–1271, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-1257-2011, 2011. a
Wu, Z., Feng, H., He, H., Zhou, J., and Zhang, Y.: Evaluation of soil moisture climatology and anomaly components derived from ERA5-land and GLDAS-2.1 in China, Water Resour. Manage., 35, 629–643, 2021. a
Ye, S., Liu, L., Li, J., Pan, H., Li, W., and Ran, Q.: From rainfall to runoff: The role of soil moisture in a mountainous catchment, J. Hydrol., 625, 130060, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.130060, 2023. a, b, c, d
Zeng, J., Yuan, X., Ji, P., and Shi, C.: Effects of meteorological forcings and land surface model on soil moisture simulation over China, J. Hydrol., 603, 126978, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126978, 2021. a
Zhang, L., Kim, T., Yang, T., Hong, Y., and Zhu, Q.: Evaluation of Subseasonal-to-Seasonal (S2S) precipitation forecast from the North American Multi-Model ensemble phase II (NMME-2) over the contiguous US, J. Hydrol., 603, 127058, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.127058, 2021. a
Zhang, L., Yang, Y., Liu, Y., and Yue, X.: Evaluation of Long Time-Series Soil Moisture Products Using Extended Triple Collocation and In Situ Measurements in China, Atmosphere, 14, 1351, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos14091351, 2023. a
Zhao, F., Veldkamp, T. I. E., Frieler, K., Schewe, J., Ostberg, S., Willner, S., Schauberger, B., Gosling, S. N., Schmied, H. M., and Portmann, F. T.: The critical role of the routing scheme in simulating peak river discharge in global hydrological models, Environ. Res. Lett., 12, 075003, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7250, 2017. a
Short summary
Land models need reliable soil properties to simulate water, but these settings are uncertain. We analyzed Community Land Model version 5 simulations for the United States from 1980 to 2010 to see how different soil settings shape patterns of soil moisture. Compared with an independent global land dataset, patterns align in many regions but differ in water-limited areas such as the Great Plains. Our maps show where to improve settings and guide future tests with observations.
Land models need reliable soil properties to simulate water, but these settings are uncertain....
