An Independent Assessment of the Monthly PRISM Gridded Precipitation Product in Central Oklahoma


Accurate, long-term records of precipitation are required for the development of climate-informed decision support tools for agriculture. But rain gauges are too sparsely located to meet this need, and radar-derived precipitation measurements are too recent in duration. Using all readily available station records, spatiotemporally continuous estimates of precipitation were created by the PRISM Climate Group to address this problem. As with all interpolated data, the validity of the gridded PRISM product requires validation, and given the extreme spatiotemporal variability of precipitation, such validation is essential. Previous work comparing the monthly precipitation product against contributing rain gauge data revealed inconsistencies that prompted the analysis reported herein. As a basis for checking the accuracy of the PRISM product, independent precipitation data gathered at a USDA research laboratory in central Oklahoma were quality controlled, including comparison to a co-located automated rain gauge operated by the Oklahoma Mesonet. Results indicate that the independent USDA gauge data are of sufficient quality to use in the evaluation of the PRISM product. The area average of the independent USDA data over a matching size area was then used to validate colocated gridded PRISM estimates. The validation results indicate that the monthly gridded PRISM precipitation estimates are close to the independent observed data in terms of means (smaller by 3% to 4.5%) and cumulative probability distributions (within ~4%), but with variances too small by 7% to 11%. From the point of view of agricultural decision support, these results indicate that PRISM estimates might be useful for probabilistic applications, such as downscaling climate forecasts or driving weather generators, assuming appropriate corrections to the higher-order statistics were applied. However, the number of months with potentially significant differences precludes the use of PRISM estimates for any retrospective month-by-month analyses of possible interactions between climate, crop management, and productivity.

Share and Cite:

J. Schneider and D. Ford, "An Independent Assessment of the Monthly PRISM Gridded Precipitation Product in Central Oklahoma," Atmospheric and Climate Sciences, Vol. 3 No. 2, 2013, pp. 249-258. doi: 10.4236/acs.2013.32026.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] J. M. Schneider and J. D. Garbrecht, “Dependability and Effectiveness of Seasonal Forecasts for Agricultural Applications,” Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural and Biolological Engineers, Vol. 49, No. 6, 2006, pp. 1737-1753.
[2] J. D. Garbrecht and J. M. Schneider, “Climate Forecast and Prediction Product Dissemination for Agriculture in the United States,” Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, Vol. 58, No. 10, 2007, pp. 966-974. doi:10.1071/AR06191
[3] NOAA National Climatic Data Centers, “Cooperative Summary of the Day TD3200/NCDC Cooperative Station Data,” 2006.
[4] C. Daly, W. P. Gibson, G. H. Taylor, M. K. Doggett and J. I. Smith, “Observer Bias in Daily Precipitation Measurements at United States Cooperative Network Stations,” Bulletin of the American Meteorologica Society, Vol. 88, No. 6, 2007, pp. 899-912. doi:10.1175/BAMS-88-6-899
[5] C. Daly, G. H. Taylor, W. P. Gibson, T. W. Parzybok, G. L. Johnson and P. Pasteris, “High-Quality Spatial Climate Data Sets for the United States and beyond,” Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural and Biolological Engineers, Vol. 43, No. 6, 2001, pp. 1957-1962.
[6] C. Daly, W. P. Gibson, M. Doggett, J. Smith and G. Taylor, “Up-to-Date Monthly Climate Maps for the Conterminous United States,” Proceedings 14th AMS Conference on Applied Climatology, Seattle, 13-16 January 2004, Paper 4.3.
[7] C. Daly, M. Halbleib, J. I. Smith, W. P. Gibson, M. K. Doggett, G. H. Taylor, J. Curtis and P. Pasteris, “Physiographically-Sensitive Mapping of Temperature and Precipitation across the Conterminous United States,” International Journal of Climatology, Vol. 28, No. 15, 2008, pp. 2031-2064. doi:10.1002/joc.1688
[8] C. Daly, “Guidelines for Assessing the Suitability of Spatial Climate Data Sets,” International Journal of Climatology, Vol. 26, No. 6, 2006, pp. 707-721. doi:10.1002/joc.1322
[9] PRISM Climate Group, “PRISM Products,” Oregon State University, 2010. http://www.prism.ore
[10] Colorado Climate Center, “Community Collaborative Rain, Hail & Snow Network,” Colorado State University, 2010.
[11] R. A. McPherson, C. A. Fiebrich, K. C. Crawford, J. R. Kilby, D. L. Grimsley, J. E. Martinez, J. B. Basara, B. G. Illston, D. A. Morris, K. A. Kloesel, A. D. Melvin, H. Shrivastava, J. M. Wolfinbarger, J. P. Bostic, D. B. Demko, R. L. Elliott, S. J. Stadler, J. D. Carlson and A. J. Sutherland, “Statewide Monitoring of the Mesoscale Environment: A Technical Update on the Oklahoma Mesonet,” Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2007, pp. 301-321. doi:10.1175/JTECH1976.1
[12] Oklahoma Mesonet, “Mesonet: Instruments, Moisture Measurements, Rain,” 2010. http://www.mes site/about/ moisture_measurements
[13] NOAA Climate Prediction Center, “Probability of Exceedance Outlook,” 2010. http://www.cpc.ncep. NFORdir/NHOME3.html
[14] J. M. Schneider and J. D. Garbrecht, “A Blueprint for the Use of CPC Precipitation Climate Forecasts in Agricultural Applications,” Proceedings 3rd Symposium on Environmental Applications, Orlando, 14-17 January 2002, pp. J71-J77.
[15] PRISM Climate Group, “PRISM Data Explorer,” Oregon State University, 2010. http://prismmap.
[16] PRISM Climate Group, “PRISM Products Matrix,” Oregon State University, 2010. http://www.prism. products/matrix. phtml?vartype=ppt&view=data

Copyright © 2022 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.