Next Article in Journal
Predicting Optical Water Quality Indicators from Remote Sensing Using Machine Learning Algorithms in Tropical Highlands of Ethiopia
Previous Article in Journal
Reservoir Ice Conditions from Multi-Sensor Remote Sensing and ERA5-Land: The Manicouagan Hydroelectric Reservoir Case Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Past, Present, and Future of Using Neuro-Fuzzy Systems for Hydrological Modeling and Forecasting
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Are the Regional Precipitation and Temperature Series Correlated? Case Study from Dobrogea, Romania

1
Department of Civil Engineering, Transilvania University of Brasov, 5, Turnului Str., 900152 Brasov, Romania
2
Department of Electronic Naval Systems, ‘Mircea cel Batran’ Naval Academy, 1, Fulgerului Str., 900218 Constanta, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Hydrology 2023, 10(5), 109; https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology10050109
Submission received: 28 March 2023 / Revised: 8 May 2023 / Accepted: 8 May 2023 / Published: 11 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Stochastic and Deterministic Modelling of Hydrologic Variables)

Abstract

:
In the context of climate change, this article tries to answer the question of whether a correlation exists between the precipitation and temperature series at a regional scale in Dobrogea, Romania. Six sets of time series are used for this aim, each of them containing ten series—precipitation and temperatures—recorded at the same period at the same hydro-meteorological stations. The existence of a monotonic trend was first assessed for each individual series. Then, the Regional time series (RTS) (one for a set of series) were built and the Mann–Kendall test was employed to test the existence of a monotonic trend for RTSs. In an affirmative case, Sen’s method was employed to determine the slope of the linear trend. Finally, nonparametric trend tests were utilized to verify if there was a correlation between the six RTSs. This study resulted in the fact that the only RTS presenting an increasing trend was that of minimum temperatures, and there was a weak correlation between the RTS of minimum precipitations and maximum temperatures.

1. Introduction

The 2021 UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report [1] warned that the effects of climate change were already widespread, rapid, and in continuous augmentation, with human activity as the dominant cause for these changes, calling urgent and ambitious action in order to limit further damage to the planet.
Climate change is a global phenomenon that affects various aspects of the Earth’s climate system [2]. Influencing other variables, precipitation and temperature are two of the most critical variables with complex patterns that depend on climate zones, topography, soil, lithology, vegetation, and land use [3,4,5]. Moreover, their connection makes the analysis and forecasting of climate change difficult, followed by the mitigation of its effects [6].
Researchers have found that global warming has led to a change in the precipitation pattern in many regions of the world [7,8,9,10]. Since the extreme precipitation and temperature events and their composed action may result in disasters affecting human lives and the economy, understanding the correlations between precipitation and temperature variations at a regional scale is an essential step in preventing the disasters’ catastrophic effects [11,12,13]. In this context, studying the precipitation-temperature dependence is essential for understanding long-term climate evolution due to the fact that the variation in any factor can also influence other variables [14].
Starting from the remark that the relationship between extreme rainfall and temperature is still unclear, Utsumi et al. [15] studied this topic based on the data recorded in various geographical zones. Nicholls et al. [16] found a strong negative correlation between maximum temperature variations and those of the precipitations in New South Wales. At the same time, such an effect was not noticed in the rest of Australia. They hypothesized that the greenhouse effect might influence the temperature-precipitation dependence because no simultaneity in the diminishing temperature and precipitation augmentation was notified for the 20th century in most of the studied areas.
The correlation between seasonal temperatures and precipitations has also drawn the attention of researchers. Such a study was conducted for Italy by Ferrari et al. [17] and Europe by Lhotka and Kyselý [18] using the CORDEX models. Isaac and Stuart [19] showed that in the north of Canada and its eastern and western coasts, warm periods in the winter and cold summer are accompanied by increased rainfall. In the mountains, rainfall appears when temperatures decrease. In this context, Vrac et al. [20] raised the question of the climate models’ reliability. Rajeevan et al. [21] found a positive correlation between precipitation and temperature in January and May and a negative one in July in India. Huang et al. [22] remarked on a negative correlation between both variables for the basin of Huanghe River during 1957–2006.
In an attempt to explain the interdependence between heat waves and other meteorological phenomena, Hafez [23] showed that the temperature increase was followed by evaporation rate augmentation, leading to changes in precipitation patterns. This may result in more intense rainfall in some regions or more severe droughts in others [24]. Additionally, changes in patterns can affect temperature through modifications in the surface energy balance. For example, increased cloud cover can reduce the amount of solar radiation absorbed by the Earth’s surface, leading to lower temperatures [25].
The Most Probable Precipitation Method (MPPM) was introduced in [26] to model the spatial evolution of precipitation series on a regional scale. Since this method does not rely on the rainfall’s characteristics, an algorithm was applied to model the regional distribution of dust aerosol in the UAE [27] and pollution in Europe [28]. Case studies proved the algorithm’s performance compared to other classical methods [26,27,29]. It has the advantage of avoiding a high computation time, a deep knowledge of spatial statistics, and restrictions related to the set’s characteristics. This article aligns with the actual research trend to clarify interdependences between temperature and precipitation. It is the continuation of the authors’ works, analyzing the relationship between the Regional Series of Temperature—RTST—and the Regional Series of Precipitation—RTSP—built by a version of MPPM. Moreover, such a correlation has not been investigated for Dobrogea, Romania, to which this study refers.

2. Study Area and Data Series

Romania is situated between some zones of different influences: in the north—Scandinavian-Baltic; in the east—continental; in the west and center—oceanic; in the southwest—Mediterranean. These influences manifest through floods, landslides, and rapid snow melting. The Carpathians form an orographic barrier between the oceanic influence from the west and continental in the east [30].
The Dobrogea region (Figure 1), Romania, is delimited by the Danube River to the west, the Danube Delta to the north, and the Black Sea to the east. More than 80.75% of this territory has altitudes lower than 150 m, and the average height is 70 m. More than 80% of the soil is formed by cernisoils and loamy soils that favor water infiltration [31]. Ielenicz and Săndulache [32] indicated that its climate was excessively continental. During the period 1965–2010, the multiannual average temperature varied from 10.8 °C to 11.8 °C [33], with variations in the intervals [−1.2; 2] and [19; 22.5] °C in winter and summer, respectively. Lower precipitation was recorded in January, February, and October, while the most significant was at the end of spring and the beginning of summer or winter. Dobrogea is the part of Romania that is most affected by drought [34,35,36,37,38,39].
The data series subject to analysis contains six sets, each formed by ten series recorded at the same period and at the same hydro-meteorological stations. They do not present gaps and are reliable and verified, being provided by the National Administration of Meteorology, Romania.
The sets consist of the minimum, maximum, and total annual precipitation and minimum, maximum, and average annual temperature series recorded for 41 years at the main meteorological series (whose names are on the map from Figure 1) in Dobrogea. The maximum and total annual precipitation series (PrecMax and PrecTot) are represented in Figure 2.
The minimum, maximum, and average annual temperature series (TempMin, TempMax, TempAv) are shown in Figure 3. The minimum annual precipitation series is denoted in the following by PrecMin.

3. Methodology

The procedure steps are the following.
  • Determine the change points (breakpoints) of the data series.
    Remember that a change point (breakpoint) is a point where there is a change in the mean, variance, or both, or, alternatively, there is a change in the probability law followed by the time series. To test the null hypothesis where the time series has no breakpoint against the existence of a breakpoint, the Pettitt [41], Buishand [42], and Lee and Heghinian [43] tests were used. These were implemented in Khronostat [44]. The first test works for any series, while for the last two, series normality is required. The reader may see [41,42,43,44] for details on these procedures.
  • Test the null hypothesis that a series does not have a monotonic trend versus the existence of such a trend at a significance level of 5%, using the Mann–Kendall test [45,46] and Sen’s slope [47].
  • Determine the RTS of the minimum, maximum, and total precipitation series, denoted by RTSPmin, RTSPmax, and RTSPtot, respectively.
  • Determine the RTS of the minimum, maximum, and average temperature series, denoted by RTSTmin, RTSTmax, and RTSTav, respectively.
  • Test hypothesis H0 that RTS does not present a monotonic trend against H1 and that such a trend exists for the RTSs of precipitations.
  • Test H0 that RTS does not present a monotonic trend against H1 and that such a trend exists for the RTSs of temperatures.
  • Test the hypothesis that there is a correlation between different RTSPs and RTSTs (for example RTSPmin—RTSTmin, RTSPmin—RTSTmax and so on) using the Spearman rho coefficient [48] and Kendall tau test [49].
These nonparametric tests were chosen because they do not rely on the series homoscedasticity or Gaussian distribution, and their sensitivity to outliers’ existence is lower than that of parametric tests [50].
The chart flow of the study is presented in Figure 4.
The method used to determine the regional series (at the third and fourth steps) was a version of the Most Probable Precipitation Method (MPPM) introduced by the authors [26,27]. To build an RTS, it can be supposed that the time series (precipitation, temperature, in this study) is recorded for T consecutive periods at m locations [26,27,28,29]. This is denoted by:
-
( x t j ) (t = 1 , T ¯ ) the series collected at jth station (j = 1 , m ¯ ),
-
X = ( x t j ) (t = 1 , T ¯ , j = 1 , m ¯ ) the matrix whose line t is formed by the values recorded at the moment t in all stations.
Then, the following procedure can be performed:
Select the number of clusters, k, to be used to run the k-means algorithm or hierarchical clustering to group the series recorded at different locations.
The optimum k must be found because its value impacts the Regional series fitting quality. Different methods have been proposed to solve this problem. Thirty are implemented in the R software in the package NbClust [51]. Some of the most known algorithms implemented are Friedmann [52], gap [53], Hartigan [54], Hubert [55], Scott [56], and Silhouette [57].
Given that the methods on which the algorithms rely are different, the output was, therefore, sometimes different. Therefore, the majority rule was usually employed to decide the optimum number of clusters, meaning that the ‘best’ k was the one that resulted in the highest number of methods.
From the clusters built in the previous step, we chose the one that contained the highest number of series. This was denoted by Clmax. Then, a new matrix can be built, XCl, with the elements of the series (on the column) from Clmax. If there are two or more clusters with the same number of elements, Clmax is the cluster with the highest separation distance between the groups and the lowest inside them [58].
  • RTS can then be built by computing the average values from each row of XCl. Thus, the RTS value at the moment t is the average of the tth row of XCl (t = 1 , T ¯ ) .
  • The modeling errors for each station can then be estimated by computing the difference between the recorded values and those of RTS.
  • The fitting quality of RTS can then be evaluated by calculating the mean absolute error (MAE) and mean standard error (MSE) from the errors determined in the previous step.
  • The RTS chart can be drawn.
Applications of this method or some version to different series are presented in [27,29]. Statistical analysis and modeling were performed with the R 4.3.2 software (https://www.r-project.org/).

4. Results and Discussion

The results of the break tests are presented in Table 1 and Table 2 for all the series. The Buishand, Pettitt, and Lee and Heghinian tests provide different change points because they relied on different methodologies. All the tests were able to detect the existence of a single breakpoint (the most important one). The first and last tests worked in the hypothesis that the series was Gaussian. When the series is not Gaussian, Khronostat searched for a transformation to be applied for the series to reach the normality; if such a transformation could not be found, the tests could not be performed, as in the situation of the Jurilovca TempMin series. Some total precipitation series had breakpoints in the period 1994–1997, according to the Lee and Heghinian test.
Table 1 shows that the Buishand test rejected the null hypotheses only for the Sulina PrecTot and PrecMax series. The Pettitt test rejected it for all but Constanta, Jurilovca, Mangalia, and Sulina PrecTot (for which the breakpoints were 1997 or 1994). The Lee and Heghinian test found change points in 2003–2004 for most series. However, one should ignore these, given that there are only one or two records after the mentioned years, so the result cannot be validated.
The results of the same tests for the temperature series are presented in Table 2. The Buishand test rejected the null hypothesis mainly for the TempMin and TempMax series. Most of the change points found by the Pettitt and Lee and Heghinian test were in 1997–1998 for the TempMin and TempMax series. It can be remarked that no concordance existed between the change point moment in the precipitation and temperature series.
The results of the Mann–Kendall test at different significance levels are given in Table 3. Among the precipitation series, only Sulina PrecTot and PrecMax experienced decreasing trends (at a significance level of 0.001).
All but the Tulcea Tmin series presented trends at different confidence levels, the most significant (positive) corresponding to Corugea, Constanta, Harsova, and Jurilovca. At a significance level of 0.05, the hypothesis that the Jurilovca Tmax series had an increasing trend could not be rejected. These results did not indicate a significant relationship between the precipitation and temperature series when recorded in the same place.
To compute RTSs, first, the optimum number of clusters was determined to be k = 2. Then, the algorithm was run with k = 2 for each series set—PrecTot, PrecMax, PrecAv, TempTot, TempMax, and TempAv. The charts of the RTSs can be seen in Figure 5.
The modeling errors for each hydro-meteorological station were calculated by the difference between the recorded values at a specific location and the values of the Regional series. The RTS goodness of fit was evaluated using the mean absolute error (MAE) and mean standard error (MSE).
A comparison of the RTSP with IDW is provided in Table 4. The validation of the RTSTs was performed using the ROCADA database [19]. Additionally, a comparison with the IDW results for the temperature series is provided in Table 5. IDW was chosen for comparisons because as one of the most utilized spatial interpolation methods implemented in different GIS software, among which ArcGIS (and its freeware versions) was the most used and well-known [59,60,61,62,63,64]. Since the RTS model explored precipitation and temperature evolution in a zone, the average values of MAE and MSE are of interest (last rows in Table 4 and Table 5).
The lower the MAE and MSE were, the better the model was. In the present case, all the MAEs from the proposed algorithm were lower than those from IDW. The same was true for the MSEs. Therefore, IDW performed the worst in all cases.
The MAEs and MSEs obtained after fitting the regional series are presented in Figure 6. It can be remarked that the MAE and MSE for each RTS did not significantly differ or have the same shapes. As expected, the highest MAE and MSE corresponded to PrecTot in the case of the precipitation series case and TempMin for the temperature series. Given the high range of values for the time series belonging to the sets of total annual precipitation and minimum temperatures (the brown curves in Figure 2 and the curves in Figure 3a), this result was expected.
The Mann–Kendall test rejected the null hypothesis, at a significance level of 0.05, only for RTSTmin. Applying Sen’s procedure to the mentioned series, a slope of the linear trend equal to 0.053 was found. The graphical representation of the RTSTmin (the black dots), the regression line (black), the limits of the confidence interval (dotted lines, blue and red), and the residual in the linear model is represented in Figure 7.
The causes of the observed trend cannot be assessed by the statistical methods for testing the null hypothesis in the Mann–Kendall test. Moreover, when working with annual data, such an attempt is not realistic. The regional time series emphasizes the tendency in the entire region that covers different sub-zones with different climate influences (continental or oceanic), including variate relief and different altitudes. Therefore, RTS summarizes all these aspects. If the majority of the local series exhibits a monotonic trend in the same direction (positive or negative), the regional trend can be expected to be the same. If the tendencies at different stations are opposite, the regional trend is either absent or has the same sign (positive or negative) as the predominant individual series trends.
Table 6, which contains the p-values of the Spearman and Kendall tau tests, results in the hypothesis that there is a correlation between the RTSPs and RTSTs being rejected for all pairs but RTSPmin—RTSTmax.
For the mentioned pairs, the Kendall tau test did not reject the correlation hypothesis, whereas the Spearman test rejected it. Still, in the last test, the p-value was slightly higher than 0.05 (the standard significance level to which the tests are usually performed). Based on these findings, one can conclude that at a significance level of 0.06, none of these tests rejected the correlation hypothesis. Still, the correlation coefficient ( ρ ) was very low ( ρ = − 0.3035 − Spearmann, ρ = −0.2217 − Kendall test). Our results are concordant with those from different parts of the world [10,11,12].
In this study, complete and verified data series were utilized. Therefore, no supplementary bias was introduced. As a consequence, the evaluation of the model’s quality was conducted by residual values. The lower the MAEs and MSEs, the better the model quality was. When the data series were not complete, a detailed discussion had to be conducted since errors would be introduced in building the regional series, affecting the correlation between the RTSP and RTST. The following situations should be treated:
(a)
Only a set of initial data series had missing values (for example, only two missing values were found in the average temperature series recorded at Adamclisi),
(b)
Both sets of data series had missing values that were not recorded in the same station or period (for example, there were missing values for the minimum temperature series at Adamclisi in 1970 and 1981 and missing values for the minimum precipitation series at Corugea in 1969, 1992, and 2003),
(c)
Both sets of data series had missing values recorded at the same time at the same station (for example, there are missing values of the minimum temperature and precipitation series recorded at Constanta in 1971, 1983, and 1994).
Different interpolation methods for replacing the missing values had to be applied in each case; the entire study had to be performed, and the results were compared. These analyses deserve a separate study that permits drawing correct conclusions, which is beyond this article.

5. Conclusions

This article aimed to determine the regional precipitation and temperature series in Dobrogea, Romania, and answer whether precipitation and temperature are correlated. Even if this topic has been studied, this is the only approach using a built Regional series employing a new method introduced by the authors, MPPM, and not the individual series recorded at different locations. Most breakpoints for the minimum temperature series were found in 1988, and for the maximum, in 1997, whereas, for the precipitation series, the most frequent change point was 2004. Moreover, no common breakpoint was found for the temperature and precipitation series when recorded at specific points.
The Mann–Kendall test from each series emphasized the existence of significant monotonic trends at a 99% confidence level only for Sulina PrecMax and PrecTot, Jurilovca Tmin and Tmax, Cernavoda and Corugea Tmax. Additionally, no concordance between the existence of an increasing/decreasing trend of precipitations/temperature series was emphasized.
The correlation study emphasized only a slight negative correlation coefficient between the RTSPmin and RTSTmax. Further studies should be performed using more series to confirm the above findings. Moreover, the most recent data series (the last 16 years) should be used, which are, unfortunately, publically unavailable at this moment. Additionally, research should be developed on monthly data to emphasize the seasonal characteristics/correlation of such series, in which case the mechanism of interaction between the temperature and precipitation series should also be investigated.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.B.; methodology, A.B.; software, A.B. and F.P.; validation, A.B. and F.P.; formal analysis, A.B.; investigation, A.B. and F.P.; resources, A.B.; data curation, A.B.; writing—original draft preparation, A.B.; writing—review and editing, A.B.; visualization, A.B. and F.P.; supervision, A.B.; project administration, A.B.; funding acquisition, A.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

This is not the case.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26). Available online: https://ukcop26.org/ (accessed on 10 March 2023).
  2. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. AR6 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2023. Available online: https://www.ipcc.ch/ (accessed on 10 March 2023).
  3. Bărbulescu, A. On the Regional Temperature Series Evolution in the South-Eastern Part of Romania. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 3904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Schultz, P.A.; Halpert, M.S. Global correlation of temperature, NDVI and precipitation. Adv. Space Res. 1993, 13, 277–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Gaume, E.; Bain, V.; Bernardara, P.; Newinger, O.; Barbuc, M.; Bateman, A.; Blaškovičová, L.; Blöschl, G.; Borga, M.; Dumitrescu, A.; et al. A compilation of data on European flash floods. J. Hydrol. 2009, 367, 70–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wazneh, H.; Altaf Arain, M.; Coulibaly, P.; Gachon, P. Evaluating the Dependence between Temperature and Precipitation to Better Estimate the Risks of Concurrent Extreme Weather Events. Adv. Meteorol. 2020, 2020, 8763631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Giorgi, F.; Anyah, R.O. The Road towards RegCM4. Clim. Res. 2012, 52, 3–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Huang, M.; Lin, Q.; Pan, N.; Fan, N.; Jiang, T.; He, Q.; Huang, L. Short-Term Precipitation Forecasting Rolling Update Correction Technology Based on Optimal Fusion Correction. J. Geosci. Environ. Prot. 2019, 7, 145–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Margaritidis, A. Site and Regional Trend Analysis of Precipitation in Central Macedonia, Greece. Comput. Water Energy Environ. Eng. 2019, 10, 49–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sam, M.; Nwaogazie, I.; Ikebude, C. Non-Stationary Trend Change Point Pattern Using 24-Hourly Annual Maximum Series (AMS) Precipitation Data. J. Water Res. Prot. 2022, 14, 592–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Garcia-Aristizabal, A.; Bucchignani, E.; Palazzi, E.; D’Onofrio, D.; Gasparini, P.; Marzocchi, W. Analysis of non-stationary climate-related extreme events considering climate change scenarios: An application for multi-hazard assessment in the Dar es Salaam region, Tanzania. Nat. Hazards 2015, 75, 289–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Mishra, V.; Wallace, J.M.; Lettenmaier, D.P. Relationship between hourly extreme precipitation and local air temperature in the United States. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2012, 39, 16403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Van Aalst, M.K. The impacts of climate change on the risk of natural disasters. Disasters 2006, 30, 5–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Jones, R.N.; Ricketts, J.H. Reconciling the signal and noise of atmospheric warming on decadal timescales. Earth Syst. Dynam. 2016, 8, 177–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Utsumi, N.; Seto, S.; Kanae, S.; Maeda, E.E.; Oki, T. Does higher surface temperature intensify extreme precipitation? Geophys. Res. Lett. 2011, 38, 074031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Nicholls, N.; Della-Marta, P.; Collins, D. 20th century changes in temperature and rainfall in New South Wales. Aust. Meteorol. Mag. 2004, 53, 263–268. [Google Scholar]
  17. Ferrari, E.; Coscarelli, R.; Sirangelo, B. Correlation Analysis of Seasonal Temperature and Precipitation in a Region of Southern Italy. Geosciences 2018, 8, 160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Lhotka, O.; Kyselý, J. Precipitation–temperature relationships over Europe in CORDEX regional climate models. Int. J. Climatol. 2022, 42, 4868–4880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Issac, G.A.; Stuart, R.A. Temperature-precipitation relationships for Canadian stations. J. Clim. 1992, 5, 822–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Vrac, M.; Thao, S.; Yiou, P. Changes in temperature–precipitation correlations over Europe: Are climate models reliable? Clim. Dyn. 2022, 60, 2713–2733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Rajeevan, M.; Pai, D.S.; Thapliyal, V. Spatial and temporal relationships between global land surface air temperature anomalies and Indian summer monsoon rainfall. Meteorol. Atmosph. Phys. 1998, 66, 157–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Huang, Y.; Cai, J.; Yin, H.; Cai, M. Correlation of precipitation to temperature variation in the Huanghe River (Yellow River) basin during 1957–2006. J. Hydrol. 2009, 372, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Hafez, Y. On the Relationship between Heat Waves over the Western and Central Europe and NAO, SOI, El-Nino 3.4 in Summer 2015. J. Geosci. Environ. Prot. 2017, 5, 31–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Turoğlu, H. Detection of Changes on Temperature and Precipitation Features in Istanbul (Turkey). Atmosph. Clim. Sci. 2014, 4, 549–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lenderink, G. Exploring Metrics of Extreme Daily Precipitation in a Large Ensemble of Regional Climate Model Simulations. Clim. Res. 2010, 44, 151–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bărbulescu, A. A new method for estimation the regional precipitation. Water Resour. Manag. 2016, 30, 33–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bărbulescu, A.; Nazzal, Y.; Howari, F. Statistical analysis and estimation of the regional trend of aerosol size over the Arabian Gulf Region during 2002–2016. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 9571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bărbulescu, A.; Postolache, F. New approaches for modeling the regional pollution in Europe. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 753, 141993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bărbulescu, A.; Postolache, F.; Dumitriu, C.Ș. Estimating the precipitation amount at regional scale using a new tool, Climate Analyzer. Hidrology 2021, 8, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ielenicz, M. Climate, Waters, Vegetation, Soils, Environment. In Physical Geography of Romania; Editura Universitară: Bucharest, Romania, 2007; Volume II. (In Romanian) [Google Scholar]
  31. Telteu, C.E.; Stan, F.I.; Oprea, O. Runoff characteristics in Dobrogea. In Air and Water Environmental Components; Presa Universitară Clujeană: Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 2013; pp. 301–308. [Google Scholar]
  32. Ielenicz, M.; Săndulache, I. Romania—Plateaus and Hills (I); Editura Universitară: Bucharest, Romania, 2008. (In Romanian) [Google Scholar]
  33. Păsculescu (Telteu), C.E. Consideration regarding the mean runoff of the main rivers from the South Dobrogea. In Air and Water—Components of the Environment; Pandi, G., Moldovan, F., Eds.; Presa Universitară Clujeană: Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 2011; pp. 379–386. [Google Scholar]
  34. Posea, G.; Bogdan, O.; Zăvoianu, I. (Eds.) Geography of Romania. In The Romanian Plain, Danube, Dobrogea Plateau, The Romanian Black Sea Seaside and the Continental Platform; Romanian Academy Printing House: Bucharest, Romania, 2005; Volume V. (In Romanian) [Google Scholar]
  35. Bărbulescu, A.; Maftei, C. Statistical approach of the behavior of Hamcearca River (Romania). Rom. Rep. Phys. 2021, 73, 703. [Google Scholar]
  36. Maftei, C.; Bărbulescu, A.; Cârsteanu, A.A. Long-range dependence in the time series of Taiţa River discharges. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2016, 61, 1740–1747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Șerban, C.; Maftei, C.; Dobrică, G. Surface Water Change Detection via Water Indices and Predictive Modeling Using Remote Sensing Imagery: A Case Study of Nuntasi-Tuzla Lake, Romania. Water 2022, 14, 556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Angearu, C.; Irimescu, A.; Mihailescu, D.; Ana, V. Evaluation of Droughts and Fires in the Dobrogea Region, Using Modis Satellite Data. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327598538_Evaluation_of_Droughts_and_Fires_in_the_Dobrogea_Region_Using_Modis_Satellite_Data#fullTextFileContent (accessed on 16 March 2023).
  39. Busuioc, A.; Caian, M.; Cheval, S.; Bojariu, R.; Boroneanţ, C.; Baciu, M.; Dumitrescu, A. Variability and Climate Change in Romania; ProUniversitaria Press: Bucharest, Romania, 2010. (In Romanian) [Google Scholar]
  40. Maftei, C.; Bărbulescu, A.; Rugină, S.; Nastac, C.D.; Dumitru, I.M. Analysis of the arbovirosis potential occurrence in Dobrogea, Romania. Water 2021, 13, 374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Pettitt, A.N. A non—Parametric approach to the change-point problem. Appl. Stat. 1979, 28, 126–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Buishand, T.A. Tests for Detecting a Shift in the Mean of Hydrological Time Series. J. Hydrol. 1984, 73, 51–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Lee, A.F.; Heghinian, S.M. A Shift of The Mean Level in A Sequence Of Independent Normal Random Variables—A Bayesian Approach. Technometrics 1977, 19, 503–506. [Google Scholar]
  44. Khronostat. Available online: http://www.hydrosciences.org/index.php/2020/09/04/khronostat/ (accessed on 19 March 2023).
  45. Mann, H.B. Nonparametric tests against trend. Econometrica 1945, 13, 245–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kendall, M.G. Rank Correlation Methods; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  47. Sen, P.K. Estimates of the regression coefficient based on Kendall’s Tau. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 1968, 63, 1379–1389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Spearman, C. The proof and measurement of association between two things. Am. J. Psychol. 1904, 15, 72–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Kendall, M. A New Measure of Rank Correlation. Biometrika 1938, 30, 81–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hamed, K.H. Trend detection in hydrologic data: The Mann–Kendall trend test under the scaling hypothesis. J. Hydrol. 2008, 349, 350–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Charrad, M.; Ghazzali, N.; Boiteau, V.; Niknafs, A. NbClust: An R Package for Determining the Relevant Number of Clusters in a Data Set. J. Stat. Softw. 2014, 61, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Friedman, H.P.; Rubin, J. On Some Invariant Criteria for Grouping Data. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1967, 62, 1159–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Tibshirani, R.; Walther, G.; Hastie, T. Estimating the number of clusters in a data set via the gap statistic. J. R. Stat. Soc. 2001, 63, 411–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Hartigan, J.A. Clustering Algorithms; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  55. Hubert, L.J.; Arabie, P. Comparing Partitions. J. Classif. 1985, 2, 193–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Scott, A.J.; Symons, M.J. Clustering Methods Based on Likelihood Ratio Criteria. Biometrics 1971, 27, 387–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Rousseeuw, P. Silhouettes: A Graphical Aid to the Interpretation and Validation of Cluster Analysis. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 1987, 20, 53–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Soetewey, A. Stats and R. The Complete Guide to Clustering Analysis: K-Means and Hierarchical Clustering by Hand and in R. Available online: https://statsandr.com/blog/clustering-analysis-k-means-and-hierarchical-clustering-by-hand-and-in-r/ (accessed on 20 May 2022).
  59. Șerban, C.; Bărbulescu, A.; Dumitriu, C.S. Maximum precipitation interpolation using an evolutionary optimized IDW algorithm. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2022, 958, 012006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Bărbulescu, A.; Băutu, A.; Băutu, E. Optimizing Inverse Distance Weighting with Particle Swarm Optimization. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 2054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Gholipour, Y.; Shahbazi, M.M.; Behnia, A.R.A.S.H. An improved version of Inverse Distance Weighting metamodel assisted Harmony Search algorithm for truss design optimization. Latin Am. J. Solids Struct. 2013, 10, 283–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Golkhatmi, N.S.; Sanaeinejad, S.H.; Ghahraman, B.; Pazhand, H.R. Extended modified inverse distance method for interpolation rainfall. Int. J. Eng. Invent. 2012, 1, 57–65. [Google Scholar]
  63. Kumari, M.; Ashoke, B.; Oinam, B.; Singh, C.K. Comparison of Spatial Interpolation Methods for Mapping Rainfall in Indian Himalayas of Uttarakhand Region. In Geostatistical and Geospatial Approaches for the Characterization of Natural Resources in the Environment; Janardhana Raju, N., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 159–168. [Google Scholar]
  64. Noori, M.J.; Hassan, H.; Mustafa, Y.T. Spatial estimation of rainfall distribution and its classification in Duhok governorate using GIS. J. Water Res. Protect. 2014, 6, 75–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Location of Dobrogea in Romania [40].
Figure 1. Location of Dobrogea in Romania [40].
Hydrology 10 00109 g001
Figure 2. The total and maximum annual precipitation the meteorological stations.
Figure 2. The total and maximum annual precipitation the meteorological stations.
Hydrology 10 00109 g002
Figure 3. (a) TempMin (b) TempAv (c) TempMax series.
Figure 3. (a) TempMin (b) TempAv (c) TempMax series.
Hydrology 10 00109 g003
Figure 4. Chartflow of the study.
Figure 4. Chartflow of the study.
Hydrology 10 00109 g004
Figure 5. The RTS for (a) Precipitation and (b) Temperature series.
Figure 5. The RTS for (a) Precipitation and (b) Temperature series.
Hydrology 10 00109 g005
Figure 6. The average MAEs and MSEs at each station with respect to RTSs for (a) Precipitation, and (b) Temperature.
Figure 6. The average MAEs and MSEs at each station with respect to RTSs for (a) Precipitation, and (b) Temperature.
Hydrology 10 00109 g006
Figure 7. The result of the Mann–Kendall test and Sen’s slope for RTSTmin.
Figure 7. The result of the Mann–Kendall test and Sen’s slope for RTSTmin.
Hydrology 10 00109 g007
Table 1. The break points of the precipitation series.
Table 1. The break points of the precipitation series.
PrecTot PrecMin PrecMax
SeriesBuishandPettittLee and
Heghinian
BuishandPettittLee and
Heghinian
BuishandPettittLee and Heghinian
Adamclisi--1994--2004--1972
Cernavoda--2004--2004--1972
Constanta-19942001--1982--2003
Corugea--2003--2004--2004
Harsova--2003--2004--1966
Jurilovca-19941994--2004reject-1973
Mangalia-19971997--2004--2004
Medgidia--1998--2004--2001
Sulinareject19941996--1966--1980
Tulcea--2004--1995--1995
Table 2. The break points of the temperature series.
Table 2. The break points of the temperature series.
TempAvTempMinTempMax
SeriesBuishandPettittLee and
Heghinian
BuishandPettittLee and
Heghinian
BuishandPettittLee and
Heghinian
Adamclisirejected19881988reject19881997reject-1997
Cernavoda--1972reject19881988--1997
Constanta--2003reject19881998reject-1997
Corugea--1972reject19881998reject-1997
Harsova--1972reject19881988--1998
Jurilovcarejected19791979not run1988not run--1998
Mangalia--2004reject19881993reject-1997
Medgidia--2001reject19881987reject-1997
Sulina-19701969--1998--1997
Tulcea--1995--1971--1988
Table 3. Results of the Mann–Kendall test.
Table 3. Results of the Mann–Kendall test.
AdamclisiCernavodaConstantaCorugeaHarsovaJurilovcaMangaliaMedgidiaSulinaTulcea
Tmin+***************+
Tmax* * ** **
Tav ++ +
PrecMin
PrecMax ***
PrecTot ***
Note: The significance level of 0.1%, 1%, 5%, and 10% are represented in the table by ***, **, *, and +, respectively.
Table 4. Comparison between the goodness of fit of the RTS and IDW for precipitation series.
Table 4. Comparison between the goodness of fit of the RTS and IDW for precipitation series.
MinMaxTotal
MAEMSEMAEMSEMAEMSE
Site No.RTSIDWRTSIDWRTSIDWRTSIDWRTSIDWRTSIDW
Adamclisi2.13.52.63.423.824.531.131.967.960.183.570.2
Cernavoda2.32.23.73.314.018.519.123.364.353.876.871.0
Constanta1.72.12.43.117.120.026.430.537.148.245.857.9
Corugea1.51.72.22.414.616.719.322.442.249.255.462.4
Harsova2.723.23.424.526.137.135.699.261.7147.284.3
Jurilovca 2.22.42.83.117.719.921.124.864.369.986.188.1
Mangalia2.02.63.43.624.726.932.642.253.256.972.772.6
Medgidia1.82.22.83.119.318.923.822.448.047.255.657.1
Sulina2.12.84.03.937.036.245.243.5116.792.9131.4111.5
Tulcea2.82.63.63.822.426.329.333.358.2171.274.5182.9
Average2.63.43.13.321.523.328.531.065.171.182.985.81
Table 5. Comparison between the fitting results from this approach (RTS) [19] and IDW for temperature series.
Table 5. Comparison between the fitting results from this approach (RTS) [19] and IDW for temperature series.
MinAverageMax
MAEMSEMAEMSEMAEMSE
Site no.RTSIDWRTSIDWRTSIDWRTSIDWRTSIDWRTSIDW
Adamclisi0.840.581.000.680.190.270.220.290.310.370.440.40
Cernavoda0.501.000.581.250.130.160.160.200.530.950.601.04
Constanta2.612.062.652.100.710.710.740.731.070.751.130.80
Corugea1.341.621.401.661.101.181.111.190.980.911.030.95
Harsova2.322.622.382.690.530.780.600.711.281.391.331.54
Jurilovca 0.690.910.831.100.080.180.100.330.320.550.420.67
Mangalia0.701.310.811.350.110.830.120.870.550.850.630.91
Medgidia0.560.350.640.410.170.120.270.140.630.290.760.39
Sulina3.423.003.473.040.460.470.510.502.462.112.512.14
Tulcea0.940.801.180.890.190.230.220.260.310.520.440.58
Average1.391.421.491.520.370.490.410.520.840.870.930.94
Table 6. Comparison of the Spearman and Kendall tau tests.
Table 6. Comparison of the Spearman and Kendall tau tests.
SpearmanRTSTavRTSTmaxRTSTmin
RTSPtot0.74680.53410.5353
RTSPmax0.72150.77930.6431
RTSPmin0.46970.05370.7488
Kendall tauRTSTavRTSTmaxRTSTmin
RTSPtot0.66130.46510.5293
RTSPmax0.71090.61310.6531
RTSPmin0.42520.04200.7531
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bărbulescu, A.; Postolache, F. Are the Regional Precipitation and Temperature Series Correlated? Case Study from Dobrogea, Romania. Hydrology 2023, 10, 109. https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology10050109

AMA Style

Bărbulescu A, Postolache F. Are the Regional Precipitation and Temperature Series Correlated? Case Study from Dobrogea, Romania. Hydrology. 2023; 10(5):109. https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology10050109

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bărbulescu, Alina, and Florin Postolache. 2023. "Are the Regional Precipitation and Temperature Series Correlated? Case Study from Dobrogea, Romania" Hydrology 10, no. 5: 109. https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology10050109

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