Next Article in Journal
A Review of Permeable Pavement Clogging Investigations and Recommended Maintenance Regimes
Previous Article in Journal
Land Use and Land Cover Changes (LULCC), a Key to Understand Soil Erosion Intensities in the Maritsa Basin
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Occurrence Probabilities of Wet and Dry Periods in Southern Italy through the SPI Evaluated on Synthetic Monthly Precipitation Series

1
National Research Council—Institute for Agricultural and Forest Systems in Mediterranean (CNR-ISAFOM), Via Cavour 4/6, 87036 Rende, Italy
2
Department of Environmental and Chemical Engineering (DIATIC), University of Calabria, Via P. Bucci 41C, 87036 Rende, Italy
3
National Research Council—Research Institute for Geo-Hydrological Protection (CNR-IRPI), University of Calabria, Via Cavour 4/6, 87036 Rende, Italy
4
Department of Computer Engineering, Modeling, University of Calabria, Electronics, and Systems Science (DIMES), Via P. Bucci 41C, 87036 Rende, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2018, 10(3), 336; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10030336
Submission received: 14 February 2018 / Revised: 9 March 2018 / Accepted: 14 March 2018 / Published: 17 March 2018

Abstract

:
The present article investigates dry and wet periods in a large area of the Mediterranean basin. First, a stochastic model was applied to a homogeneous database of monthly precipitation values of 46 rain gauges in five regions of southern Italy. In particular, after estimating the model parameters, a set of 104 years of monthly precipitation for each rain gauge was generated by means of a Monte Carlo technique. Then, dry and wet periods were analyzed through the application of the standardized precipitation index (SPI) over 3-month and 6-month timespan (short-term) and 12-month and 24-month period (long-term). As a result of the SPI application on the generated monthly precipitation series, higher occurrence probabilities of dry conditions than wet conditions have been detected, especially when long-term precipitation scales are considered.

1. Introduction

Recently, the adverse impacts of climate change have become a main focus of the scientific community, due to the possible intensification of extreme phenomena such as heat waves, forest fires, flood and droughts [1]. In fact, given the changes in the precipitation patterns triggered by anthropogenic climate change, several cities in the world are registering an increase in their vulnerability to flooding, also due to rapid urbanization [2,3]. Moreover, a warmer climate could cause an increase in the burned area and an extension of the fire season in the next decades [4]. In particular, the Mediterranean region has recently suffered from a temperature increase faster than the global mean and, with the warming and drying projections, this area could be affected by more frequent heat waves and dry spells [5]. In this scenario, the knowledge of drought phenomena plays an important role for an appropriate planning and management of water resources [6,7]. In fact, different drought events have affected Europe during recent decades [8,9,10,11] and an increase in the drought frequency is expected in this century in some seasons and areas [12,13], following the recently evidenced variability of precipitation and/or evapotranspiration [14,15,16,17]. The consequences of such changes can significantly affect some areas, such as the Mediterranean Basin, already under stress from a water shortage, due to a combination of a dry climate and excessive water demand [18]. At the same time, the knowledge of wet conditions is also paramount because extreme wet conditions can cause flooding, damage crops, reduce yields, and contribute to groundwater contamination [19,20,21]. In fact, climate change could also increase the risk of future hydrological extremes over a large regional scale and trigger further pressure on water resource availability [22]. For these reasons, recently, several studies have focused on the analyses of the distribution of dry and wet periods events in several parts of the world [23,24,25,26,27,28,29].
Generally, climate anomalies are evaluated by means of indices that allow scientists to characterize them in terms of intensity, duration, frequency, recurrence probability and spatial extent [30,31]. Among these indices, the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) [32,33] has found widespread application worldwide [34,35,36,37,38], in the Mediterranean basin [39,40,41] and also in Central [42] and Southern Italy [43,44,45,46,47,48].
The SPI can be evaluated for several time-scales and allows for the investigation of different dry or wet classes. Indeed, the SPI is considered one of the most robust and effective indices [49]. Moreover, in order to evaluate the SPI, only precipitation data are required, and so it is easier to calculate than more complex indices. Finally, the SPI allows for the comparison of dry or wet conditions in different areas and for different time periods [40,50].
Unfortunately, in the study of long dry and wet periods, two kinds of problems can affect the analysis. The first problem is related to the length of the precipitation series and to the limited number of drought events in the historical data, especially with a long duration [51]. The second problem is related to the presence of missing values in the precipitation series, which may significantly influence the estimate of the event duration and the character of their alternation [52]. In order to overcome such a difficulty, stochastic models are frequently used to produce long and complete precipitation series that are statistically similar to historical records [53]. Specifically, numerous approaches for the stochastic modeling of daily precipitation data are available in the hydrological and climatological literature [54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62]. However, very little work has been done on stochastic generation of monthly precipitation data [63] because in the past, low attention was paid to this time aggregation. In this context, several authors applied the Monte Carlo simulation for drought analysis [64]. In particular, Montaseri and Amirataee [65] evaluated the inherent performance of seven meteorological drought indices in several parts of the world characterized by different climatic conditions. They highlighted the advantages of application of the Monte Carlo technique in drought monitoring and recommended to not only count on historical data series when long-term drought events have to be generalized. In this paper, as opposed to past studies which have focused on the analysis of daily precipitation in limited area, a recently proposed model [48] for the stochastic simulation of monthly precipitation data has been adapted and applied on a large area. The aim of this study is to analyze the probabilistic occurrence of dry and wet periods through the application of the SPI to monthly precipitation series generated by a Monte Carlo procedure based on a data set of 46 rain gauges uniformly distributed on a large part of Southern Italy.
The paper has been structured in two main sections. In Section 2, first a brief description of the study area is presented and, then, the procedure for stochastic modeling of precipitation at monthly scale and the SPI method have been described. In Section 3, results of the application of the SPI on the monthly precipitation, generated for each rain gauge by means of a Monte Carlo technique based on the stochastic model, are presented and discussed.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Case Study

The region under investigation, with an area of about 85,000 km2, is a large portion of southern Italy, ranging from Campania and Apulia in the North, to Sicily in the South (Figure 1).
The study area is located in the middle of the Mediterranean basin and is characterized by peculiar climatic conditions. In particular, the islands and the coastal areas are dominated by a Mediterranean climatic regime, characterized by mild and rainy winters and hot and dry summers. In the inland and the mountainous areas an Apennine climate prevails, with very cold winters and hot summers, and a rather uniform precipitation distribution throughout the year.
The database used in this study has been extracted by the one presented in Longobardi et al. [66] in which available precipitation data were tested for time series homogeneity through the combined use of direct and indirect methods. The database consists of 46 monthly precipitation series, in the period 1916–2006, with an average density of about 1 station per 1850 km2 (Figure 1 and Table 1).

2.2. Stochastic Modeling of Monthly Precipitation

In this subsection, the procedure proposed by Caloiero et al. [48] for the generation of synthetic monthly precipitation data is briefly presented.
Being Hij (j = month; i = year) the sequence of random variables which describes the cumulated precipitation from a non-specified origin i = 0, and defining Nj as the number of days of the j-month and I0 as a generic reference value of the daily precipitation intensity (assumed in this work equal to 1 mm/day), the dimensionless random variables:
X i j = H i j N j I 0 ,
indicate a sequence which can be described as a discrete cyclostationary stochastic process with period P equal to 12 months.
By adopting the transformation Y i j = X i j λ (for λ > 0 and Xij > 0), finalized to the gaussianisation of the process, the sequence of random variables Zk:
Z k = Y i j μ Y , j σ Y , j   with   k = 12 i + j ,
is a standardized stationary Gaussian stochastic process, where both the functions μ Y , j = E i ( Y i j ) and σ Y , j = E i ( Y i j 2 ) μ Y , j 2 are employed to the deseasonalization of the monthly precipitation process.
The mean μ Y , j and the variance σ Y , j 2 functions can be described by means of expansion of truncated Fourier series, expressed as linear superposition of sine and cosine functions with different frequencies. The estimation procedures of the number of harmonics ( N h ( μ ) and N h ( σ 2 ) ) and of the parameters of both the functions μ Y , j and σ Y , j are well described in Caloiero et al. [48].
Generally, a weak correlative structure appears in the sequence of the random variables Zk. If this correlation is significant, it can be modelled as an autoregressive process of order p. Being Zk standardized Gaussian variables and considering a white noise standardized Gaussian process Wk, it can be written:
Z k = ψ 0 W k + l = 1 p ϕ l Z k l ,
Using the sample values rZ,l of the autocorrelation coefficients of lag l (l = 1, .., p) of the sequence Zk, by solving the Yule-Walker system it is possible to estimate the parameters ϕ l and consequently ψ 0 with the following relation [67]:
ψ ^ 0 = 1 l = 1 p ϕ ^ l r Z , l
The p-order of the autoregressive process can be fixed as the minimum value for which cannot be rejected the hypothesis H 0 , p ( ρ ν ) that the sample biases w p , k = ( z k l = 1 p ϕ ^ l z k l ) / ψ ^ 0 with k = p + 1, p + 2 are uncorrelated (for lag v = 1, 2, …). The Anderson test [68,69] allows to test the hypothesis H 0 , p ( ρ ν ) at a significance level α. The test must be applied also in the case p = 0, for which W0,k = Zk and w0,k = zk, in order to verify the hypothesis that the process Zk can be considered as a white noise.

2.3. Standardized Precipitation Index

In this study, dry and wet periods were expressed using the SPI [32] on different time scales. Indeed, it is generally agreed that the SPI on short-term scales (e.g., 3 or 6 months) describes drought affecting vegetation and agricultural practices, while on long-term scales (e.g., 12 or 24 months) it is a broad proxy for water resource management [70]. Angelidis et al. [71] described in detail the calculation of SPI. The index is computed by fitting an appropriate probability density function (pdf) to the frequency distribution of precipitation summed over the time scale of interest (usually 3, 6, 12, and 24 months). This is performed separately for each time scale and for each location in space. Computation of the SPI involves fitting a gamma function to a given time series of precipitation, with probability density function (pdf) defined as:
g ( x ) = 1 β α Γ ( α ) x α 1 e x / β   for   x > 0 ,
where α > 0 is a shape parameter, β > 0 is a scale parameter, x > 0 is the amount of precipitation and Γ(α) is the gamma function. Fitting the distribution to the data requires α and β to be estimated for each month of the year and for each time aggregation. Using the approximation of Thom [72], these parameters can be estimated as follows:
α = 1 4 A ( 1 + 1 + 4 A 3 ) , β = x ¯ α   with   A = ln ( x ¯ ) ln ( x ) n ,
where n is the number of observations. Integrating the pdf with respect to x yields the cumulative distribution function (cdf) G(x):
G ( x ) = 0 x g ( x ) d x = 1 β α Γ ( α ) 0 x x α 1 e x / β d x ,
It is possible to have several zero values in a sample set. In order to account for zero value probability, since the gamma distribution is undefined for x = 0, the cdf for the gamma distribution is modified as:
H ( x ) = q + ( 1 q ) G ( x ) ,
where q is the probability of zero precipitation, given by the ratio between the number of zeros in the precipitation series (m) and the number of observations (n).
Finally, the cdf is transformed into the standard normal distribution to yield the SPI. Following the approximate conversion provided by Abramowitz and Stegun [73], it results:
z = SPI = ( t c 0 + c 1 t + c 2 t 2 1 + d 1 t + d 2 t 2 + d 3 t 3 ) , t = ln ( 1 ( H ( x ) ) 2 )   for   0 < H ( x ) < 0.5 ,
z = SPI = + ( t c 0 + c 1 t + c 2 t 2 1 + d 1 t + d 2 t 2 + d 3 t 3 ) , t = ln ( 1 ( 1 H ( x ) ) 2 )   for   0.5 < H ( x ) < 1 ,
where c0, c1, c2, d1, d2 and d3 are mathematical constants.
Although McKee et al. [32] originally proposed a classification restricted only to drought periods, it has become customary to use the index to classify wet periods as well. Table 2 reports the climatic classification according to the SPI, provided by the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC, http://drought.unl.edu).

3. Results

In order to generate the long synthetic monthly precipitation series, for each of the selected 46 rain gauges, the parameters of the applied model ( λ , number of harmonics N h ( μ ) and N h ( σ 2 ) , and p order of the autoregressive model) were estimated (Table 3). In particular, for the mean function, the number of harmonics N h ( μ ) have been evaluated equal to 2 for almost all the rain gauges, with the exception of the Capo Spartivento, Castelbuono, Floresta, Palermo and Trapani gauges for which 3 harmonics are needed. From Figure 1 it can be easily seen that all these 5 rain gauges lies on an ideal horizontal line, thus evidencing a possible connection between the obtained results and the latitude. Moreover, 4 out 5 of these rain gauges, all in the northern side of Sicily, are exposed to the north-western air currents. For the variance function, Table 3 shows more heterogeneous results in the number of harmonics N h ( σ 2 ) : 1 harmonic has been evaluated for 15 out of 46 rain gauges (33%), 2 harmonics for 25 rain gauges (54%) and 3 harmonics for the other 6 rain gauges (13%), thus no clear clusters can be identified.
For all the rain gauges, the sequences of observed values zk showed low linear correlation coefficients, but not low enough to consider the process Zk uncorrelated. In fact, the application of the Anderson test, with a lag vmax = 24, to the zk series evidenced that only for 18 rain gauges the process Zk can be considered as a white noise (p = 0), while for the other 28 precipitation series, it is sufficient to adopt an autoregressive model of order p = 1.
After the parameters estimation, 104 years long synthetic series have been generated for each rain gauge through a Monte Carlo procedure, and the SPI data were evaluated both for short (SPI3 and SPI6) and long (SPI12 and SPI24) time scales. Considering the SPI classification (Table 2), the occurrence probabilities of the various classes of dry and wet conditions were evaluated for each rain gauge. The results were also spatially interpolated using a spline technique.
Figure 2 shows the results obtained through the evaluation of the SPI over a 3-month timespan.
Concerning the extreme drought conditions (Figure 2a), few areas located in the Campania and Calabria regions evidenced probability values greater than 3%, while most of the study area, and particularly the Tyrrhenian side, showed extreme droughts probabilities ranging between 2.5% and 3% (Figure 2a). The areas (Figure 2b) with the highest probabilities of severe droughts (till an occurrence probability of 5.5%) are similar to the ones obtained for the extreme drought conditions, even though most of the study area showed probabilities ranging between 4% and 4.5% (Figure 2b). As regards the distribution of the occurrence probability of moderate droughts (Figure 2c), the highest values have been evaluated in the Campania region, in the same area where the highest extreme and severe dry values have been identified, and on the eastern and the south-eastern sides of Calabria and Sicily, respectively (Figure 2c). For this drought class, most part of the study area presented probabilities ranging between 8% and 9%. Concerning the occurrence probability distributions of wet conditions (Figure 2d–f), generally opposite results than those referred to dry conditions have been detected. However, there are areas where high probability values were evaluated for both dry and wet conditions which are mainly located on the Ionian side of the Basilicata and the Calabria regions (Figure 2d,e). As a general result, for this short time-scale (3 months), the probabilities of dry conditions are higher than those of wet conditions. This is confirmed by Figure 3, in which the results obtained for both dry and wet conditions, at the various time-scales, are summarized.
In particular, for the 3-month SPI (Figure 3a), the average probabilities values of the severe and extreme drought conditions are higher than those corresponding to the severe and extreme wet ones. Moreover, the average probability value of the extreme drought condition (about 2.5%) is higher than the theoretical one (2.3%) presented by McKee et al. [32].
Figure 4 shows the results of the occurrence probabilities evaluated for the 6-month SPI.
In particular, Figure 4a points out the spatial distribution of the probabilities of extreme droughts. The highest probability values (>3%) have been localized in two small areas of Northern Calabria and Northern Sicily. The spatial probability distribution of severe values (Figure 4b) showed similar results to those evaluated for the 3-month SPI but with higher values, reaching 6% in some areas of Campania and Calabria. Regarding the moderate drought conditions (Figure 4c), most part of the study area presented occurrence probability values ranging between 8% and 9% with the highest probabilities mainly identified in Campania and Calabria (values > 10%).
Also for the 6-month SPI, the extreme and severe wet conditions (Figure 4d,e) showed lower probabilities values than the ones obtained for dry conditions, with the highest values detected only in small areas of Apulia, Basilicata, Calabria and Sicily (between 2.5% and 3%).
Concerning the severe conditions, most of the study area evidenced probability values lower than 4% and between 4% and 4.5%, with Sicily showing probability values higher than the other three regions of the study area. Finally, the moderate wet conditions (Figure 4f) showed high probability values (between 9% and 10%) across almost all the study area and in particular between Apulia and Basilicata, on the Tyrrhenian side of Calabria and in large coastal areas of Sicily. Similar to the 3-month SPI, also for the 6-month SPI (Figure 3b), the average probability values of severe and extreme dry conditions are always greater than the wet ones.
In Figure 5a the spatial distribution of the occurrence probabilities of extreme drought values for the 12-month SPI are shown. The highest probability values (>3%) have been detected in the northern parts of Campania and Apulia, on the Tyrrhenian side of Calabria and on the northernmost and the southernmost areas of Sicily. The majority of the study area presented probability values ranging between 1.5% and 2.5%. Concerning the severe drought, only limited areas in Calabria and Campania presented occurrence probabilities values higher than 6% (Figure 5b), while almost all the study area evidenced occurrence probabilities lower than 4%. As regards the moderate drought conditions (Figure 5c), a large portion of the study area showed probabilities values ranging between 8% and 10%, with the highest values (>10%) located in Calabria, Campania and in the southernmost part of Sicily. Generally, the wet conditions (Figure 5d–f) presented lower probabilities than the dry ones. In particular, while similar results (occurrence probabilities >3%) have been identified in Apulia and in Sicily for extreme wet (Figure 5d) and drought conditions, the severe wet conditions showed very low occurrence probabilities (<4%) for almost all the study area (Figure 5e).
Regarding the moderate wet range (Figure 5f) of the 12-month SPI values, Sicily and Apulia showed the highest probabilities values (between 8% and 10%). Figure 3c shows that for the 12-month SPI the average probability values of the different dry classes are always higher than the wet ones.
Finally, concerning the 24-month SPI, the results of the spatial analysis are shown in Figure 6. The highest probability values for the extreme drought conditions (>3%) have been detected in northern Campania, in the northern Tyrrhenian side of Calabria and in the northernmost and southernmost areas of Sicily (Figure 6a). The majority of the investigated territory presented probability values of severe dry conditions lower than 4%, with only few areas of Campania, Calabria and Sicily, where the probabilities reach values greater than 6% (Figure 6b).
Regarding the moderate dry values for the 24-month SPI (Figure 6c), a large portion of the study area on the Tyrrhenian side, covering parts of the Campania, Basilicata and Calabria regions, showed probability values higher than 10%.
As regards the wet extreme values, a high percentage of the study area presented probabilities lower than 1%. In fact, only two small areas in Sicily evidenced probability values higher than 3% (Figure 6d). Similar results have been obtained for the severe wet conditions (Figure 6e) while for the moderate wet values, the highest probabilities, although lower than 10%, have been detected in Sicily and Apulia. The differences between dry and wet values of the 24-month SPI are clearly summarized in Figure 3d, which confirms that the average probability values of the different dry classes are always higher than the wet ones.
As a summary of the results obtained for the severe and extreme drought conditions, on a short-term the highest probability values have been mainly obtained in few areas located in the Campania and Calabria regions while, considering the long-term, the highest probability values have been detected in the northern parts of Campania, on the Tyrrhenian side of Calabria and on the northernmost and the southernmost areas of Sicily.
The results of this paper confirm that there are more chances for dry conditions than wet conditions [74,75]. This is a critical issue for agricultural areas such as southern Italy, that suffers climate change [76,77,78] which is a major driver of agricultural and meteorological drought.

4. Conclusions

The investigation of dry and wet periods in a large area of southern Italy, through the stochastic modeling of 46 monthly precipitation series and the subsequent synthetic generation by means of a Monte Carlo technique, allowed the comparison among the occurrence probabilities of different classes of SPI values, for both short- and long-term periods. The obtained results showed a decreasing tendency of the occurrence probability of both dry and wet conditions when the time scale increases (passing from 3 to 24 months), with the exception of the moderate dry conditions that presented a different behavior. In fact, in a large area partially covering mainly Campania and Basilicata regions, higher than expected probability values for moderate droughts coexist with lower than expected probability values for moderately wet periods, thus evidencing the clear shift towards drier conditions. The results also show some areas where both the dry and wet conditions reach the maximum of probability values, evidencing high variability of precipitation temporal distribution. In general, the average values of occurrence probability both of dry and wet conditions are almost always lower than the experimental McKee values, with the exception of the extreme dry SPI3 values.

Author Contributions

Beniamino Sirangelo conceived of and designed the stochastic modeling; Tommaso Caloiero analyzed the data and performed the applications; Roberto Coscarelli and Ennio Ferrari contributed to the results and discussion; all the Authors wrote the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Estrela, T.; Vargas, E. Drought management plans in the European Union. Water Resour. Manag. 2010, 26, 1537–1553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Willems, P.; Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K.; Olsson, J.; Nguyen, V.T.V. Climate change impact assessment on urban rainfall extremes and urban drainage: Methods and shortcomings. Atmos. Res. 2012, 103, 106–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kreibich, H.; Di Baldassarre, G.; Vorogushyn, S.; Aerts, J.C.; Apel, H.; Aronica, G.T.; Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K.; Bouwer, L.M.; Bubeck, P.; Caloiero, T.; et al. Adaptation to flood risk: Results of international paired flood event studies. Earth’s Future 2017, 5, 953–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Flannigan, M.D.; Amiro, B.D.; Logan, K.A.; Stocks, B.J.; Wotton, B.M. Forest fires and climate change in the 21st century. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2006, 11, 847–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Lionello, P.; Abrantes, F.; Gacic, M.; Planton, S.; Trigo, R.; Ulbrich, U. The climate of the Mediterranean region: Research progress and climate change impacts. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2014, 14, 1679–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Li, Y.; Ye, W.; Wang, M.; Yan, X. Climate change and drought: A risk assessment of crop-yield impacts. Clim. Res. 2009, 39, 31–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Yevjevich, V.; Da Cunha, L.; Vlachos, E. Coping with Droughts; Water Resources Publications: Littleton, CO, USA, 1983. [Google Scholar]
  8. Zaidman, M.D.; Rees, H.G.; Young, A.R. Spatio-temporal development of streamflow droughts in north-west Europe. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2012, 5, 733–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Lloyd-Huhes, B.; Saunders, M.A. A drought climatology for Europe. Int. J. Climatol. 2002, 22, 1571–1592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fink, A.H.; Brücher, T.; Krüger, A.; Leckebush, G.C.; Pinto, J.G.; Ulbrich, U. The 2003 European summer heatwaves and drought-synoptic diagnosis and impacts. Weather 2004, 59, 209–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Hannaford, J.; Lloyd-Hughes, B.; Keef, C.; Parry, S.; Prudhomme, C. Examining the large-scale spatial coherence of European drought using regional indicators of precipitation and streamflow deficit. Hydrol. Processes 2011, 25, 1146–1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. IPCC. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation, A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  13. IPCC. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  14. Philandras, C.M.; Nastos, P.T.; Kapsomenakis, J.; Douvis, K.C.; Tselioudis, G.; Zerefos, C.S. Long term precipitation trends and variability within the Mediterranean region. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2011, 11, 3235–3250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Kelley, C.P.; Ting, M.; Seager, R.; Kushnir, Y. Mediterranean precipitation climatology, seasonal cycle, and trend as simulated by CMIP5. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2012, 39, L21703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Brunetti, M.; Caloiero, T.; Coscarelli, R.; Gullà, G.; Nanni, T.; Simolo, C. Precipitation variability and change in the Calabria region (Italy) from a high resolution daily dataset. Int. J. Climatol. 2012, 32, 57–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Caloiero, T.; Buttafuoco, G.; Coscarelli, R.; Ferrari, E. Spatial and temporal characterization of climate at regional scale using homogeneous monthly precipitation and air temperature data: An application in Calabria (Southern Italy). Hydrol. Res. 2015, 46, 629–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. De Luis, M.; Raventos, J.; Gonzalez-Hidalgo, J.C.; Sanchez, J.R.; Cortina, J. Spatial analysis of rainfall trends in the region of Valencia (East of Spain). Int. J. Climatol. 2000, 20, 1451–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Falloon, P.D.; Betts, R.A. The impact of climate change on global river flow in HadGEM1 simulations. Atmos. Sci. Lett. 2006, 7, 62–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Peterson, T.C.; Heim, R.R.; Hirsch, R.; Kaiser, D.P.; Brooks, H.; Diffenbaugh, N.S.; Dole, R.M.; Giovannettone, J.P.; Guirguis, K.; Karl, T.R.; et al. Monitoring and understanding changes in heat waves, cold waves, floods, and droughts in the United States: State of knowledge. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2013, 94, 821–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Montanarella, L. Trends in land degradation in Europe. In Climate and Land Degradation; Sivakumar, M.V.K., Ndegwa, N., Eds.; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany, 2007; pp. 83–104. [Google Scholar]
  22. Lehner, B.; Döll, P.; Alcamo, J.; Henrichs, T.; Kaspar, F. Estimating the impact of global change on flood and drought risks in Europe: A continental, integrated analysis. Clim. Chang. 2006, 75, 273–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Minetti, J.L.; Vargas, W.M.; Poblete, A.G.; de la Zerda, L.R.; Acuña, L.R. Regional droughts in southern South America. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2010, 102, 403–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Feng, S.; Hu, Q.; Oglesby, R.J. Influence of Atlantic sea surface temperatures on persistent drought in North America. Clim. Dynam. 2011, 37, 569–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Fang, K.; Gou, X.; Chen, F.; Davi, N.; Liu, C. Spatiotemporal drought variability for central and eastern Asia over the past seven centuries derived from tree-ring based reconstructions. Quat. Int. 2013, 283, 107–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hua, T.; Wang, X.M.; Zhang, C.X.; Lang, L.L. Temporal and spatial variations in the Palmer Drought Severity Index over the past four centuries in arid, semiarid, and semihumid East Asia. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2013, 58, 4143–4152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Caloiero, T.; Coscarelli, R.; Ferrari, E.; Sirangelo, B. Analysis of Dry Spells in Southern Italy (Calabria). Water 2015, 7, 3009–3023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Sirangelo, B.; Caloiero, T.; Coscarelli, R.; Ferrari, E. A stochastic model for the analysis of the temporal change of dry spells. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk. Assess. 2015, 29, 143–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sirangelo, B.; Caloiero, T.; Coscarelli, R.; Ferrari, E. Stochastic analysis of long dry spells in Calabria (Southern Italy). Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2015, 127, 711–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Wilhite, D.A.; Hayes, M.J.; Svodoba, M.D. Drought monitoring and assessment in the US. In Drought and Drought Mitigation in Europe; Voght, J.V., Somma, F., Eds.; Kluwers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2000; pp. 149–160. [Google Scholar]
  31. Tsakiris, G.; Pangalou, D.; Vangelis, H. Regional drought assessment based on the Reconnaissance Drought Index (RDI). Water Resour. Manag. 2007, 21, 821–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. McKee, T.B.; Doesken, N.J.; Kleist, J. The relationship of drought frequency and duration to time scales. In Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Applied Climatology, Anaheim, CA, USA, 17–22 January 1993; pp. 179–184. [Google Scholar]
  33. McKee, T.B.; Doesken, N.J.; Kleist, J. Drought monitoring with multiple time scales. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Applied Climatology, Dallas, TX, USA, 15–20 January 1995; pp. 233–236. [Google Scholar]
  34. Dubrovsky, M.; Svoboda, M.D.; Trnka, M.; Hayes, M.J.; Wilhite, D.A.; Zalud, Z.; Hlavinka, P. Application of relative drought indices in assessing climate-change impacts on drought conditions in Czechia. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2009, 96, 155–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zhai, L.; Feng, Q. Spatial and temporal pattern of precipitation and drought in Gansu Province Northwest China. Nat. Hazards 2009, 49, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Xingcai, L.; Zongxue, X.U.; Bo, L. Spatio-temporal characteristics of Standardized Precipitation Index in the Taihu Basin during 1951–2000. Wuhan Univ. J. Nat. Sci. 2009, 14, 518–524. [Google Scholar]
  37. Logan, K.E.; Brunsell, N.A.; Jones, A.R.; Feddema, J.J. Assessing spatiotemporal variability of drought in the US central plains. J. Arid Environ. 2010, 74, 247–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Manatsa, D.; Mukwada, G.; Siziba, E.; Chinyanganya, T. Analysis of multidimensional aspects of agricultural droughts in Zimbabwe using the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI). Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2010, 102, 287–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sönmez, F.K.; Kömüscü, A.Ü.; Erkan, A.; Turgu, E. An analysis of spatial and temporal dimension of drought vulnerability in Turkey using the Standardized Precipitation Index. Nat. Hazards 2005, 35, 243–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Vicente-Serrano, S.M. Differences in spatial patterns of drought on different time sales: An analysis of the Iberian Peninsula. Water Resour. Manag. 2006, 20, 37–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Livada, I.; Assimakopoulos, V.D. Spatial and temporal analysis of drought in Greece using the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI). Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2007, 89, 143–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Vergni, L.; Todisco, F. Spatio-temporal variability of precipitation temperature and agricultural drought indices in Central Italy. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2011, 151, 301–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Bonaccorso, B.; Bordi, I.; Cancelliere, A.; Rossi, G.; Sutera, A. Spatial variability of drought: An analysis of SPI in Sicily. Water Resour. Manag. 2003, 17, 273–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Mendicino, G.; Senatore, A.; Versace, P. A Groundwater Resource Index (GRI) for drought monitoring and forecasting in a Mediterranean climate. J. Hydrol. 2008, 357, 282–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Capra, A.; Consoli, S.; Scicolone, B. Long-term climatic variability in Calabria and effects on drought and agrometeorological parameters. Water Resour. Manag. 2013, 27, 601–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Buttafuoco, G.; Caloiero, T. Drought events at different timescales in southern Italy (Calabria). J. Maps 2014, 10, 529–537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Buttafuoco, G.; Caloiero, T.; Coscarelli, R. Analyses of Drought Events in Calabria (Southern Italy) Using Standardized Precipitation Index. Water Resour. Manag. 2015, 29, 557–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Caloiero, T.; Coscarelli, R.; Ferrari, E.; Sirangelo, B. An Analysis of the Occurrence Probabilities of Wet and Dry Periods through a Stochastic Monthly Rainfall Model. Water 2016, 8, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Capra, A.; Scicolone, B. Spatiotemporal variability of drought on a short–medium time scale in the Calabria Region (Southern Italy). Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2012, 3, 471–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wu, H.; Hayes, M.J.; Wilhite, D.A.; Svoboda, M.D. The effect of the length of record on the standardized precipitation index calculation. Int. J. Climatol. 2005, 25, 505–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Mishra, A.K.; Singh, V.P. Drought modeling—A review. J. Hydrol. 2011, 403, 157–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Zolina, O.; Simmer, C.; Belyaev, K.; Sergey, K.; Gulev, S.; Koltermann, P. Changes in the duration of European wet and dry spells during the last 60 years. J. Clim. 2013, 26, 2022–2047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Wilks, D.S.; Wilby, R.L. The weather generation game: A review of stochastic weather models. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 1999, 23, 329–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Hayhoe, H.N. Improvements of stochastic weather data generators for diverse climates. Clim. Res. 2000, 14, 75–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Liu, J.; Williams, J.R.; Wang, X.; Yang, H. Using MODAWEC to generate daily weather data for the EPIC model. Environ. Model. Softw. 2009, 24, 655–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Richardson, C.W. Stochastic simulation of daily precipitation temperature and solar radiation. Water Resour. Res. 1981, 17, 182–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Sharma, A.; Lall, U. A nonparametric approach for daily rainfall simulation. Math. Comput. Simulat. 1999, 48, 361–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Srikanthan, R.; McMahon, T.A. Stochastic Generation of Rainfall and Evaporation Data; Technical Report 84; Australian Water Resources Council, Department of Resources and Energy: Canberra, Australia, 1985.
  59. Srikanthan, R.; Harrold, T.I.; Sharma, A.; McMahon, T.A. Comparison of two approaches for generation of daily rainfall data. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk. Assess. 2005, 19, 215–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Wan, H.; Zhang, X.; Barrow, E.M. Stochastic modelling of daily precipitation for Canada. Atmos. Ocean 2005, 43, 23–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Woolhiser, D.A. Modelling daily precipitation—Progress and problems. In Statistics in the Environmental and Earth Sciences; Walden, A.T., Guttorp, P., Eds.; Edward Arnold: London, UK, 1992; pp. 71–89. [Google Scholar]
  62. Zheng, X.; Katz, R.W. Mixture model of generalized chain-dependent processes and its application to simulation of interannual variability of daily rainfall. J. Hydrol. 2008, 349, 191–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Srikanthan, R.; McMahon, T.A. Stochastic generation of annual monthly and daily climate data: A review. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2001, 5, 653–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Yang, P.; Ling, T. Comparison of Bootstrapping and Markov Chain Monte Carlo for Copula Analysis of Hydrological Droughts. In Proceedings of the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting 2015, San Francisco, CA, USA, 14–18 December 2015. Abstract ID: H12F-07. [Google Scholar]
  65. Montaseri, M.; Amirataee, B. Comprehensive stochastic assessment of meteorological drought indices. Int. J. Climatol. 2017, 37, 998–1013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Longobardi, A.; Buttafuoco, G.; Caloiero, T.; Coscarelli, R. Spatial and temporal distribution of precipitation in a Mediterranean area (Southern Italy). Environ. Earth Sci. 2016, 75, 189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Priestly, M.B. Spectral Analysis and Time Series; Academic Press: London, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  68. Anderson, R.L. Distribution of serial correlation coefficient. Ann. Math. Stat. 1942, 13, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Haan, C.T. Statistical Methods in Hydrology; Iowa State University Press: Ames, IA, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  70. Edwards, D.; McKee, T. Characteristics of 20th century drought in the United States at multiple scale. In Atmospheric Science Paper 634; Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University: Fort Collins, CO, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  71. Angelidis, P.; Maris, F.; Kotsovinos, N.; Hrissanthou, V. Computation of drought index SPI with Alternative Distribution Functions. Water Resour. Manag. 2012, 26, 2453–2473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Thom, H.C.S. A note on the gamma distribution. Mon. Weather Rev. 1958, 86, 117–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Abramowitz, M.; Stegun, I.A. Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables; Dover Publications, INC: New York, NY, USA, 1970. [Google Scholar]
  74. Giordano, R.; Preziosi, E.; Romano, E. Integration of local and scientific knowledge to support drought impact monitoring: Some hints from an Italian case study. Nat. Hazards 2013, 69, 523–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Wu, J.; He, B.; Lu, A.; Zhou, L.; Liu, M.; Zhao, L. Quantitative assessment and spatial characteristics analysis of agricultural drought vulnerability in China. Nat. Hazards 2011, 56, 785–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Caloiero, T.; Coscarelli, R.; Ferrari, E.; Mancini, M. Trend detection of annual and seasonal rainfall in Calabria (Southern Italy). Int. J. Climatol. 2011, 31, 44–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Caloiero, T.; Callegari, G.; Cantasano, N.; Coletta, V.; Pellicone, G.; Veltri, A. Bioclimatic analysis in a region of southern Italy (Calabria). Plant Biosyst. 2015, 150, 1282–1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Pellicone, G.; Caloiero, T.; Coletta, V.; Veltri, A. Phytoclimatic map of Calabria (Southern Italy). J. Maps 2014, 10, 109–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Study area with the locations of the 46 rain gauges.
Figure 1. Study area with the locations of the 46 rain gauges.
Water 10 00336 g001
Figure 2. Maps of the monthly occurrence probabilities of Extreme drought (a), Severe drought (b), Moderate drought (c), Extremely wet (d), Severely wet (e) and Moderately wet (f) conditions for the 3-month SPI.
Figure 2. Maps of the monthly occurrence probabilities of Extreme drought (a), Severe drought (b), Moderate drought (c), Extremely wet (d), Severely wet (e) and Moderately wet (f) conditions for the 3-month SPI.
Water 10 00336 g002
Figure 3. Box-plots of the regional occurrence probabilities of Extreme, Severe and Moderate drought and wet conditions for the 3-month (a), 6-month (b), 12-month (c) and 24-month (d) SPI. The lines indicate the theoretical values proposed by McKee et al. [32].
Figure 3. Box-plots of the regional occurrence probabilities of Extreme, Severe and Moderate drought and wet conditions for the 3-month (a), 6-month (b), 12-month (c) and 24-month (d) SPI. The lines indicate the theoretical values proposed by McKee et al. [32].
Water 10 00336 g003
Figure 4. Maps of the monthly occurrence probabilities of Extreme drought (a), Severe drought (b), Moderate drought (c), Extremely wet (d), Severely wet (e) and Moderately wet (f) conditions for the 6-month SPI.
Figure 4. Maps of the monthly occurrence probabilities of Extreme drought (a), Severe drought (b), Moderate drought (c), Extremely wet (d), Severely wet (e) and Moderately wet (f) conditions for the 6-month SPI.
Water 10 00336 g004
Figure 5. Maps of the monthly occurrence probabilities of Extreme drought (a), Severe drought (b), Moderate drought (c), Extremely wet (d), Severely wet (e) and Moderately wet (f) conditions for the 12-month SPI.
Figure 5. Maps of the monthly occurrence probabilities of Extreme drought (a), Severe drought (b), Moderate drought (c), Extremely wet (d), Severely wet (e) and Moderately wet (f) conditions for the 12-month SPI.
Water 10 00336 g005
Figure 6. Maps of the monthly occurrence probabilities of Extreme drought (a), Severe drought (b), Moderate drought (c), Extremely wet (d), Severely wet (e) and Moderately wet (f) conditions for the 24-month SPI.
Figure 6. Maps of the monthly occurrence probabilities of Extreme drought (a), Severe drought (b), Moderate drought (c), Extremely wet (d), Severely wet (e) and Moderately wet (f) conditions for the 24-month SPI.
Water 10 00336 g006
Table 1. Main details of the selected rain gauges.
Table 1. Main details of the selected rain gauges.
ID CodeRain GaugeRegionLongitudeLatitudeNo. of Years of Observation
1Benevento (Genio Civile)Campania14.76941.11772
2BisacciaCampania15.38041.00882
3CasalvelinoCampania15.10240.18476
4Caserta (Genio Civile)Campania14.31941.06781
5NuscoCampania15.08840.88684
6S. Angelo a FasanellaCampania15.33640.45180
7Salerno (Genio Civile)Campania14.73640.66779
8CersosimoBasilicata16.34840.05165
9GrassanoBasilicata16.27040.63261
10LagopesoleBasilicata15.73740.80483
11MarateaBasilicata15.71739.98462
12PisticciBasilicata16.73540.29567
13Vaglio di LucaniaBasilicata15.91640.66768
14AltamuraApulia16.55440.82486
15Bari (Osservatorio)Apulia16.87341.11886
16BiccariApulia15.19141.39384
17BrindisiApulia17.93840.62986
18CerignolaApulia15.90641.26485
19San Marco in LamisApulia15.63741.71187
20Santa Maria di LeucaApulia18.35639.80085
21TarantoApulia17.25140.46586
22ViesteApulia16.17641.88186
23CampoteneseCalabria16.06839.87379
24Capo SpartiventoCalabria16.05637.92768
25Cassano allo IonioCalabria16.31939.78374
26CecitaCalabria16.53839.40070
27CittanovaCalabria16.07838.35277
28CosenzaCalabria16.26539.28779
29FiladelfiaCalabria16.29338.78776
30Isola di Capo RizzutoCalabria17.09438.96167
31JoppoloCalabria15.90538.59268
32San Pietro in GuaranoCalabria16.31439.34672
33ScillaCalabria15.72038.25264
34TirioloCalabria16.51038.94058
35AcirealeSicily15.15937.59985
36CastelbuonoSicily14.07937.92981
37Castronuovo di SiciliaSicily13.59937.67982
38Chiaramonte GulfiSicily14.69937.02986
39FlorestaSicily14.90937.97985
40LeonforteSicily14.37937.62981
41NotoSicily15.05936.87982
42Palermo Oss. AstronomicoSicily13.34938.09961
43Palma di MontechiaroSicily13.75937.19981
44San SabaSicily15.49938.27969
45SciaccaSicily13.07937.49985
46TrapaniSicily12.49938.00984
Table 2. Climate classification according to the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) values [32].
Table 2. Climate classification according to the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) values [32].
SPI ValueClassProbability (%)
SPI ≥ 2.0Extremely wet2.3
1.5 ≤ SPI < 2.0Severely wet4.4
1.0 ≤ SPI < 1.5Moderately wet9.2
0.0 ≤ SPI < 1.0Mildly wet34.1
−1.0 ≤ SPI < 0.0Mild drought34.1
−1.5 ≤ SPI < −1.0Moderate drought9.2
−2.0 ≤ SPI < −1.5Severe drought4.4
SPI < −2.0Extreme drought2.3
Table 3. Values of the transformation parameter λ, number of harmonics N h ( μ ) and N h ( σ 2 ) for the mean and the variance functions, respectively, and p-order of the autoregressive model, estimated for each rain gauge.
Table 3. Values of the transformation parameter λ, number of harmonics N h ( μ ) and N h ( σ 2 ) for the mean and the variance functions, respectively, and p-order of the autoregressive model, estimated for each rain gauge.
ID CodeRain Gaugeλ N h ( μ ) N h ( σ 2 ) p
1Benevento (Genio Civile)0.436211
2Bisaccia0.546211
3Casalvelino0.490230
4Caserta (Genio Civile)0.473221
5Nusco0.510221
6S.Angelo a Fasanella0.429221
7Salerno (Genio Civile)0.433220
8Cersosimo0.359210
9Grassano0.429221
10Lagopesole0.469221
11Maratea0.461220
12Pisticci0.352211
13Vaglio Di Lucania0.444230
14Altamura0.431220
15Bari (Osservatorio)0.413220
16Biccari0.488221
17Brindisi0.393220
18Cerignola0.407211
19San Marco in Lamis0.431220
20Santa Maria di Leuca0.383231
21Taranto0.374221
22Vieste0.392211
23Campotenese0.466221
24Capo Spartivento0.338320
25Cassano allo Ionio0.473220
26Cecita0.442221
27Cittanova0.401211
28Cosenza0.477221
29Filadelfia0.477231
30Isola di Capo Rizzuto0.315231
31Joppolo0.498210
32San Pietro in Guarano0.513221
33Scilla0.484211
34Tiriolo0.405221
35Acireale0.299210
36Castelbuono0.390320
37Castronuovo Di Sicilia0.389210
38Chiaramonte Gulfi0.371211
39Floresta0.378320
40Leonforte0.363211
41Noto0.320211
42Palermo Oss. Astronomico0.431320
43Palma di Montechiaro0.333230
44San Saba0.381221
45Sciacca0.331211
46Trapani0.408321

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Caloiero, T.; Sirangelo, B.; Coscarelli, R.; Ferrari, E. Occurrence Probabilities of Wet and Dry Periods in Southern Italy through the SPI Evaluated on Synthetic Monthly Precipitation Series. Water 2018, 10, 336. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10030336

AMA Style

Caloiero T, Sirangelo B, Coscarelli R, Ferrari E. Occurrence Probabilities of Wet and Dry Periods in Southern Italy through the SPI Evaluated on Synthetic Monthly Precipitation Series. Water. 2018; 10(3):336. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10030336

Chicago/Turabian Style

Caloiero, Tommaso, Beniamino Sirangelo, Roberto Coscarelli, and Ennio Ferrari. 2018. "Occurrence Probabilities of Wet and Dry Periods in Southern Italy through the SPI Evaluated on Synthetic Monthly Precipitation Series" Water 10, no. 3: 336. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10030336

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop