Precipitation and temperature are significant inputs for hydrological models. Currently, many satellite and reanalysis precipitation and air temperature datasets exist at different spatio-temporal resolutions at a global and quasi-global scale. This study evaluated the performances of three open-access precipitation datasets (gauge-adjusted research-grade Global Satellite Mapping of Precipitation (GSMaP_Gauge), Climate Hazards Group Infrared Precipitation with Station data (CHIRPS), Climate Forecast System Reanalysis(CFSR)) and CFSR air temperature dataset in driving the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model required for the monthly simulation of streamflow in the upper Shiyang River Basin of northwest China. After a thorough comparison of six model scenarios with different combinations of precipitation and air temperature inputs, the following conclusions were drawn: (1) Although the precipitation products had similar spatial patterns, however, CFSR differs significantly by showing an overestimation; (2) CFSR air temperature yielded almost identical performance in the streamflow simulation than the measured air temperature from gauge stations; (3) among the three open-access precipitation datasets, CHIRPS produced the best performance. These results suggested that the CHIRPS precipitation and CFSR air temperature datasets which are available at high spatial resolution (0.05), could be a promising alternative open-access data source for streamflow simulation in the case of limited access to desirable gauge data in the data-scarce area.

Multisource meteorological re-analyses are the most reliable forcing data for driving hydrological models to simulate streamflow. We aimed to assess the different hydrological responses through hydrological modeling in the upper Lancang-Mekong River Basin (LMRB) using the two gridded meteorological datasets, climate forecast system reanalysis (CFSR) and the China Meteorological Assimilation Driving Datasets for the SWAT model (CMADS). We selected the Pearson’s correlation coefficient (R), percent bias (PBIAS), and root mean square error (RMSE) indices to compare the six meteorological variables of the two datasets. The spatial distributions of the statistical indicators in the CFSR and CMADS, namely, the R, PBIAS, and RMSE values, were different. Furthermore, the soil and water assessment tool plus (SWAT+) model was used to do hydrological modeling based on CFSR and CMADS meteorological re-analyses in the upper LMRB. Different meteorological datasets resulted in significant differences of hydrological responses, which reflected by different sensitive parameters and their optimal value. These different calibrated optimal values of sensitive parameters further lead to the different simulated water balance components between CFSR- and CMADS-based SWAT+ model. These findings can help in a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of different meteorological re-analysis datasets and the roles on the hydrological modeling.