Low-flow simulation and forecasting remains a difficult issue for hydrological modellers, and intercomparisons can be extremely instructive for assessing existing low-flow prediction models and for developing more efficient operational tools. This research presents the results of a collaborative experiment conducted to compare low-flow simulation and forecasting models on 21 unregulated catchments in France. Five hydrological models (four lumped storage-type models – Gardenia, GR6J, Mordor and Presages – and one distributed physically oriented model – SIM) were applied within a common evaluation framework and assessed using a common set of criteria. Two simple benchmarks describing the average streamflow variability were used to set minimum levels of acceptability for model performance in simulation and forecasting modes. Results showed that, in simulation as well as in forecasting modes, all hydrological models performed almost systematically better than the benchmarks. Although no single model outperformed all the others for all catchments and criteria, a few models appeared to be more satisfactory than the others on average. In simulation mode, all attempts to relate model efficiency to catchment or streamflow characteristics remained inconclusive. In forecasting mode, we defined maximum useful forecasting lead times beyond which the model does not bring useful information compared to the benchmark. This maximum useful lead time logically varies between catchments, but also depends on the model used. Simple multi-model approaches that combine the outputs of the five hydrological models were tested to improve simulation and forecasting efficiency. We found that the multi-model approach was more robust and could provide better performance than individual models on average.

The Somme River Basin is located above a chalk aquifer and the discharge of the somme River is highly influenced by groundwater inflow (90% of river discharge is baseflow). In 2001, the Somme River Basin suffered from a major flood causing damages estimated to 100 million euro (Deneux and Martin, 2001). The purpose of the present research is to evaluate the ability of four hydrologic models to reproduce flood events in the Somme River Basin over an 18-year period, by comparison with observed river discharge and piezometric level as well as satellite-derived extents of flooded area. The models used differ in their computation of surface water budget and in their representation of saturated and unsaturated zones. One model needed structural modification to be able to accurately simulate the riverflows of the Somme river. The models obtained fair to good simulations of the observed piezometric levels, but they all overestimate the piezometric level after flooding, possibly because of a simplistic representation of deep unsaturated flow. Models differ in their annual partition of the infiltration of water within the root zone (mostly driven by simulated evapotranspiration), but these differences are attenuated by water transfers within the saturated and unsaturated zone. As a consequence, the inter-model dispersion of the computed annual baseflow is reduced. The aquifer overflow areas simulated during flooding compare well with local data and satellite images. The models showed that this overflow occurs almost every year in the same areas (in floodplain), and that the flooding of 2001 was characterized by an increase in the quantity of the overflow and not much by a spreading of the overflow areas. Inconsistencies between river discharge and piezometric levels suggest that further investigation are needed to estimate the relative influence of unsaturated and saturated zones on the hydrodynamics of the Somme River Basin.