SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
txts01.docWord document41Ktxts01.doc Description of the methods used and additional results in the main manuscript.
ts01.docWord document45Kts01.doc Table S1. The administrative zones in the east region and the total gross storage capacity of reservoirs and net coal mass change (in equivalent water volume) during 2003-2011 in the administrative zones.
ts02.docWord document58Kts02.doc Table S2. The administrative zones in the west region and the total gross storage capacity of reservoirs and net coal mass change (in equivalent water volume) during 2003-2011 in the administrative zones.
ts03.docWord document35Kts03.doc Table S3. Inter-basin water diversion from the Yellow River to the east region.
fs01.pdfPDF document104Kfs01.pdf Fig. S1. Linear trend of monthly original (without scaling) GRACE TWS data from January 2003 to December 2011. The trend estimated using the original (without scaling) CSR, GFZ, and JPL products, respectively. d, the mean of the three trends is mapped. The cross symbols indicate the areas where the trend (in panels a, b, and c) or all the three trends (in panel d) are significant at the 99% confidence level or higher according to the two-tailed Student's t-test. The data in June 2003, January 2011, and June 2011 are not used in the trend calculation because GRACE TWS data were unavailable in these months.
fs02.pdfPDF document92Kfs02.pdf Fig. S2. Linear trend of monthly scaled GRACE TWS data from January 2003 to December 2011. a, b, and c, The trend estimated using the scaled CSR, GFZ, and JPL products, respectively. d, the mean of the three trends is mapped. The cross symbols indicate the areas where the trend (in panels a, b, and c) or all the three trends (in panel d) are significant at the 99% confidence level or higher according to the two-tailed Student's t-test. The data in June 2003, January 2011, and June 2011 are not used in the trend calculation because GRACE TWS data were unavailable in these months.
fs03.pdfPDF document469Kfs03.pdf Fig. S3. Plain area covered by the groundwater monitoring well network. The red dash line shows the plain area covered by the monitoring well network. The blue stars and lines give the 2 hydrologic stations, Luanxian and Guantai, and their controlling catchment areas.
fs04.pdfPDF document15Kfs04.pdf Fig. S4. Comparison of VIC simulated monthly streamflow with the naturalized streamflow during 1958-1977 at the Luanxian and Guantai stations. The Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NS) and correlation coefficient (R) are given.
fs05.pdfPDF document18Kfs05.pdf Figure S5. The contributions of the GRACE TWS (original data without scaling) during 2003-2011. The sum of surface mass change (i.e. sum of natural surface-water, reservoir, coal transport and inter-basin water diversion when applicable) and estimated groundwater contributions (shown as deviations from the initial mass in equivalent water thickness) in the west (a) and east (b) regions, and the contributing items (i.e. natural surface-water, reservoir, coal transport, and inter-basin water diversion when applicable) in the west (c) and east (d) regions. The natural surface-water estimates from the VIC and Noah models were shown. The estimated shallow aquifer change from monitoring well network is shown in panel b. The uncertainty in the scaled GRACE TWS data (the range of CSR, GFZ, and JPL products) is shown by error bars. The grey shading indicates the uncertainty in the estimated groundwater storage change.
readme.docWord document31KSupporting Information

Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.