CASE STUDIES______________________________________________________
LAKE DADASETS
To consider a wide range of lake types in the lake models validation in a systematical manner, some strategy of lake classification should be chosen. However, this classification must not be extremely sophisticated (i.e. including large number of lake types) to avoid huge number of model runs (number of models * number of experiments * number of validation sites) difficult to analyze. The classification might be optimized as follows:
Table 1. Some examples of the lake classification in the LakeMIP (Source : Stepanenko et al. 2009)
| Location | Deep/ shallow | Name (location) | Mixing regime | Lake average/ maximal depth (m) | |
deep shallow |
non freezing non freezing |
? ? |
Victoria (Africa) | 40 avg, 83 max | |
deep shallow |
non freezing non freezing |
Geneva (Switzerland) Balaton (Hungary)
Alqueva (Portugal) |
309 max 3.9 avg, 12.5 max 40 |
||
deep shallow |
freezing freezing |
Lake superior (canada) Sparkling Lake (USA)
Trout Bog (USA) |
409 max 11 avg, 20 max 5.6 avg, 7.9 max |
||
deep shallow |
freezing freezing |
Toolik (USA) |
2.4 |
||
deep shallow |
|||||
shallow |
non freezing | Kossenblatter (Germany) | 2 avg, 6 max |
This classification includes 11 types of lakes. At the moment, not all of these are represented above by particular lakes with available limnological data and meteorological forcing of sufficient quality (e.g. time resolution not less than 1 hour). However, as soon as the missing data become available it will be included. Additionally to Table 1, the data from two more lakes different in transparency but similar in terms of other physical characteristics will be utilized in the project. All the lakes selected need to have a large residence time (more than 2 years), as it is problematic to simulate the through flow effects in one dimensional models.
A part of observational data on lakes is freely available at the Internet sites; others have become available by personal communication. In every case the terms of usage of this data in LAKEMIP must be negotiated with the data owners.
As far as the overall lake model intercomparison procedure is not fully completed, during the first phase of the project (i.e. LAKEMIP1) only few lakes of Table 1 will be used. As the intercomparison technical and methodological details become well established (at the following phases of the project), the other lakes will be incorporated in the study.
The few lakes, which have to be used at the first phase of the project, should have been previously well studied both by experimental campaigns and modelling efforts.
_____________________________________________________________________________