Escuela Superior Politcnica del Litoral

Facultad de Ingeniera en Ciencias de la Tierra

Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

R. Antna, A. Crdenasa, C. Freirea, J. Moreiraa*
Espol-Fict, Campus Gustavo Galindo, Guayaquil Ecuador.

Abstract
The next work follows an explanation of Geostatistics applied to spatial interpolation of rainfall. Concepts as
semivariogram and its parameters, Kriging and Kriging methods are explained in the theory. These concepts are taken in a
computational procedure with ArcGIS applied to a case of study at the Guayas River Basin (GRB). Rainfall data from
the GRB was provided and transformed to a point shapefile. From that data, the empirical semivariogram was built and
fitted to three model semivariograms with Ordinary Kriging. The semivariograms were compared between them to choose
the best model. Surface maps and prediction values for data gaps were computed for monthly precipitation data for each
March from 2002 to 2006. Finally, it was concluded that some additional parameters as trends or some transformation of
data can refine the Kriging process inside ArcGIS and help computing better predicted values. It was also concluded that
the least squares method gives the best fitting of a model, but not always the fittest model gives a better definition of
reality.
Keywords: Geostatistics; Precipitation; Guayas River Basin; Kriging

1. Introduction
Precipitation is an important phase of the hydrologic cycle. It comes from clouds due to a process
condensation which occurs after evaporation. Its the main source of water for many types of water bodies and
river basins (Raghunath, 2006).
One of the most important types of precipitation is rainfall. As seen in nature, in large areas rainfall is not
uniformly distributed; and it varies over time. Rainfall analysis is crucial for applications such as agriculture
and infrastructure planning. In that sense, hydrologic sciences methods for estimating rainfall data gaps
include interpolation and extrapolation (Arnell and Liu, 2001).

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

Interpolation is the method for estimating information from data points which are known. The use of
interpolation methods to estimate data gaps leads to large uncertainties with respect to the estimate data from
runoff. To reduce uncertainties, spatial interpolation is used for making estimations for hydrological models.
Geostatistics is one of the most popular techniques for spatial interpolation. It can estimate a regionalized
value at un-sampled points with help of a group of observed values. The method uses semi-variograms for
characterizing the spatial dependence in the property of interest. Some important methods for geostatistical
interpolation of data are Ordinary Kriging (ORK), Universal Kriging (UNK) and Kriging with External Drift
(KED). There are other studies using radar measurements which scientists have proven it can have more
accuracy than simple rainfall data (Ly et al, 2011).
The present study will focus on the comparison of three semivariograms with Ordinary Kriging: Spherical
(OK-S), Exponential (OK-E) and Gaussian (OK-G); applied to monthly rainfall at several gauging stations
across the GRB.
Nomenclature
GRB

Guayas River Basin

OK

Ordinary Kriging

OK-S

Ordinary Kriging with Spherical Semivariogram

OK-E

Ordinary Kriging with Exponential Semivariogram

OK-G

Ordinary Kriging with Gaussian Semivariogram

2. Theoretical Framework
2.1. Geostatistics and Geostatistical Interpolation
Geostatistics can be described as the theory of regionalized variables applied to estimating spatial
phenomena (Matheron, 1969); while the interpolation can be described as the procedure using a geostatistical
method not only for estimating data gaps, but to analyze the performance of a mathematical hypothesis: If the
model is appropriated for describing the behavior of spatial phenomena (Carr, 1989).
2.2. General procedure for the estimation of data using geostatistical interpolation
Any geostatistical method for interpolation follows a general procedure (David, 1972): (i) Building the
semivariogram. (ii) Fitting an adequate model. (iii) Producing block estimates or estimating data gaps. The
interpolated value depends of the relation between each known spatial data in the next formula for spatial
interpolation (Ly, 2011):
n

Z ( g ) i Z (s) i
i

The variable Z (g) can be seen as the value in a location g that will be estimated. Z (s) will be every point
in a location s whose information is known. The parameter is the weight given to a single point. It can be
seen as the result of estimating the importance of the spatial known data.

(1)

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

2.3. Semivariogram
A semivariogram can be described as a function which determines quantitatively the spatial relationship
among measuring stations during an event as rainfall.

2 ( si , si h)

1 n
( Z ( si ) Z (si h)) 2

n i

1
2

( si , s j ) var[ Z ( si ) Z ( s j )]

(2)

(3)

The variable Si is the location of a station i and Sj is the location for a station j positioned an h
distance from i. This h distance is often called lag. If the lag size is too large, short-range autocorrelation
may be masked. If the lag size is too small, there may be useful relationship that is not taken into account. N
is the number of pairs of stations (Si,Sj). If the stations are located in an irregular distance, h is an average
value (Carr, 1989). Finally Z is a spatially distributed random function, in this case is the measured
precipitation. Once the values of the semivariogram are computed, they must be plotted in a graphic of
Y=semivariogram vs X=lag.
Range is an R=h lag or distance value which describes the limit of the spatial relationship between stations.
From zero to the range the locations are spatially autocorrelated. Outside the range there is not a relationship
between stations, for example in one model can be seen that the semivariogram no longer increases and is
either constant or erratic. In the range R, the value of the semivariogram is called the sill. A semivariogram
does not need to attain a sill to be useful in Kriging.
Closer to the interception of the y-axis, its usual to have measurement errors or spatial variation at
distances closer to zero. Those errors cause an effect called nugget which is the value of the semivariogram at
an h=0.
Finally, there are some ways to fit the empirical semivariogram to a model: Estimating the nugget, sill and
range values by eye, making computational procedures in a geostatistical program or using the Weighted
least squares criteria (Cressie, 1985):

empirical
C N (hi )
1

i 1
model

One can compute the coefficient C for each model, and the selected model will be the one which gives the
smallest coefficient.
2.4. Models of semivariograms
In the current study, three semivariogram models are used: Spherical, Exponential and Gaussian.

(4)

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

0
;h 0
3

h
h

spherical 0 1 1.5 0.5 ;0 h 2

2
2

; h 2

0 1

(5)

;h 0

exponential 1 exp 3 h
0
1
;h 0

(6)

0
;h 0

h
gaussian
1 exp 3 ; h 0
0 1
2

(7)

The parameters 0, h and 2 are referred to as nugget, distance and range. The semivariogram value at
range 2 is equal to the sill 0+1.
2.5. Kriging Methods and Ordinary Kriging
Kriging methods can be described as formulas or equation systems used to determine the weight of spatial
data taking in count the hypothetical relationship between stations given by a model semivariogram
(Matheron, 1969). In Ordinary Kriging the weights are obtained such that the estimation is unbiased and the
variance is minimized. Ordinary Kriging assumes the next model where is a unknown constant (Goovaerts,
1999):

n
i ij i 0
i 1 ns

i 1

i 1

j 1,...,n

3. Methodology
3.1. Data setup
Excel files with the measured precipitation data in thirty stations with their coordinates WGS1984 at the
GRB are provided. The data contains daily rainfall data from year 1963 to 2008. Next, a polygon shapefile of
Ecuador Basins is downloaded. This is to ensure that the spatial interpolation doesnt catch rainfall data
outside GRB.
Excel lists with all the stations are made with their spatial coordinates and the rainfall data. This new Excel
file is transformed into a point shapefile in ArcMAP.
Finally, the data is able to be visualized and can be fixed depending of the requirements of the Kriging
method. Also, the method becomes more efficient as one got more stations. As the years which have less data
gaps are between 2002 and 2006, the paper covers monthly rainfall data of each March from that range.

(8)

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

3.2. Computational procedure

ArcMAP possesses a tool called Geostatistical Analyst that must follow a structured process: Represent
the data, exploring the data, fitting a model, performing diagnostics and compare models.
The Geostatistical Wizard has some spatial interpolation methods as Kriging. In the case of OK, the
procedure behind the Geostatistical Wizard starts with the building of the empirical semivariogram given by
equations 2 and 3. Next the empirical semivariogram is fitted to a model with equations 4 and then 5, 6 or 7.
After that, the hypothetical spatial relationship between stations is established. Then, with equation 8, the
weight of spatial data is obtained for their use in equation 1.
Equation 1 determines the interpolated value in one point. The Geostatistical Wizard does that same
procedure for many points in a way that a surface map can be built.
Finally, the Geostatistical Wizard builds surface maps for each model. In this case three semivariogram
models are needed for each one of the five lists made in Excel. In total, fifteen surface maps are made.
4. Computational details
4.1. Data setting
The next files were given: 1) Daily rainfall data for thirty stations at the GRB and 2) A list with the station
coordinates. The data in those files will be combined in a new list made in Excel as the one shown in Fig.1
STATION
EAST
NORTH
PRECIPITATION (mm)
Babahoyo
663179
9801311
Balzar
621542
9850450
Caluma
694159
9820519
Camposano2
566617
9823916
Chiriboga
746874
9976710
El Corazon
714141
9874600
Flavio Alfaro
622159
9950129
Inmoriec Vergel
683167
9913530
Isla Bejucal
650581
9814769
La Cancha
660527
9952918
La Capilla
611696
9812512
La Palizada
657185
9939866
Mocache
667564
9869861
Murucumba
650866
9900802
Nobol
608748
9789961
OlmedoManab
587791
9845685
Pedernales
605098
10006412
Pichilingue
667951
9881590
Pilalo
723122
9895638
Presa
639272
9898288
Puebloviejo
662200
9832160
Puerto Ila
684847
9947365
Puerto Limon
681399
9957183
Rio Congo
645203
9885571
San Antonio del Delta Pa
695073
9904015
San Juan La Man
695182
9898707
StoDomingoAirport
700326
9972354
Union 71
668655
9938481
Vinces
639054
9828748
Zapotal (Los Ros)
687140
9850388

Fig. 1: Excel list with rainfall data and coordinates for each station. Precipitation will be monthly for each March from 2002 to 2006.

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

The precipitation column must be filled with data from rainfall precipitation of one month only. In this
case, March. Because analysis covers data of each March from 2002 to 2006, the number of lists needed is
five. It is very important to save data as .xls and not .xlsx.
Finally, rainfall data gaps must not be included inside the list. For that, some considerations must be taken
in account: Caluma has data gaps in each March from 2002 to 2006. Chiriboga doesnt belong to the
GRB. Inmoriec Vergel, Isla Bejucal, Pedernales, StoDomingoAirport dont work between 2002 and
2006. El Corazon has data gaps in March 2005. Vinces has data gaps in March 2004. Fig. 2 shows how
an Excel list for rainfall data at March 2004 must be done.
STATION
Babahoyo
Balzar
Camposano2
El Corazon
Flavio Alfaro
La Cancha
La Capilla
La Palizada
Mocache
Murucumba
Nobol
OlmedoManab
Pichilingue
Pilalo
Presa
Puebloviejo
Puerto Ila
Puerto Limon
Rio Congo
San Juan La Man
Union 71
Zapotal (Los Ros)

EAST NORTH P4
663179 9801311 314.3
621542 9850450 404.6
566617 9823916 259.5
714141 9874600 572.3
622159 9950129
333
660527 9952918 395.4
611696 9812512 284.8
657185 9939866 264.2
667564 9869861 405.3
650866 9900802 356.4
608748 9789961 102.4
587791 9845685
390
667951 9881590 366.2
723122 9895638 161.1
639272 9898288 197.8
662200 9832160 468.7
684847 9947365
244
681399 9957183 283.6
645203 9885571 245.8
695182 9898707 443.4
668655 9938481 254.02
687140 9850388 460.9

Fig. 2: Excel list with rainfall data of March 2004. Stations with data gaps were removed from the list.

4.2. Transforming the data to shapefile

Once the excel list is gotten, ArcMAP must be opened. Using the option Add data, the excel list is
added to ArcMAP. With right click on the excel layer, the option Display XY data must be selected. Next,
fields for the X and Y coordinates must be specified: For X: EAST and for Y: NORTH. The coordinate
system of input coordinates is WGS84 and the UTM Zone 17 S.
Now the excel list is showed also as a point layer with all the stations showed on the map. This layer is
then exported as a new point shapefile. The option Label Features is selected for identifying the stations
names.
A polygon shapefile with Ecuador basins can be downloaded in the IGM website
(http://www.igm.gob.ec/cms/files/downloads/mapafisico.html). After this shapefile is added to the map, only
the GRB is exported to a new layer. By making this, data outside the basin is ignored as Chiriboga station.
Finally, the layer symbology is edited in a way that the points color is graduated from blank for lowest
values, to black for highest values. Measured rainfall data in each can be compared in a punctual way on the
map and it also can be useful for comparing map surfaces. The map in Fig. 3 has the GRB map with the
stations for precipitation data from March 2004.

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

Fig. 3: GRB map with stations plotted with colors range from white for lowest values to black with highest values. Precipitation from
197.8 to 284.8 mm can be observed to the north of GRB.

4.3. Exploring the data

The tools Histogram and Semivariogram/Covariance cloud from the Geostatistical Analyst are used
for exploring data relationship.
The histogram plots the distribution of the precipitation values. The height of each bar represents the
frequency of data within each class. By selecting the histogram bars, the sample points within the histogram
range are selected too (Fig. 4a and 4b). The number of bars in the histogram can be changed for grouping
better the sample points. Its good to remember that histograms with either too many or very few bars
compared to the number of stations do not represent the frequency of data. Finally, it is important to observed
features of distributions (central value, spread, and symmetry).

Fig. 4: Histogram data. GRB March 2004: (a) Histogram with 9 bars. Precipitation values from 384 to 431 mm can be observed; (b)
Histogram with 10 bars. Precipitation values from 243 to 290 mm can be observed.

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

The semivariogram/Covariance cloud builds the empirical semivariogram with equations 2 and 3. It allows
examining the spatial autocorrelation between the measured sample points. By selecting points close to the
zero in the x-axis, relationships can be observed (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5: Semivariogram/Covariance cloud. GRB March 2004. The selected points have excellent relationship in a way that predicted
values in locations closer to those stations are the most accurate.

4.4. Fitting a model

For fitting a model, the Geostatistical Wizard must be used. The first step is the selection of the
interpolation method (OK) and selecting the measured sample values as the input data. The output data is of a
prediction type. Transformations and trends removal werent used for the analysis.
Next, model variograms (OK-S, OK-E and OK-G with equations 5. 6 and 7) are selected. The model
parameters for each semivariogram can be optimized using an iterative cross validation technique and the
weighted least square algorithm with equation 4. But, if those methods arent reliable, default parameters can
be modified: Nugget, partial sill and lag. In Fig. 6 the empirical semivariogram is being fitted to a model.

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

Fig. 6: Semivariogram modeling. GRB March 2004. The optimize model option is used to modify the default parameters. The
empirical semivariogram is fitted to an exponential semivariogram model.

The mathematical formula representing the spatial autocorrelation between stations is used in equation 8
multiple times for computing the weights of the rainfall data. And finally, the Geostatistical Wizard uses
equation 1 for plotting the surface map with the results of equation 8 as seen in Fig. 7.

Fig. 7: Prediction map for GRB March 2004. Not only were the original stations plotted, but also those with data gaps. The color of the
points has some relationship with the color of the surfaces, denoting some efficacy of the Kriging method.

10

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

4.5. Performing diagnostics

The main criteria used for the diagnostics was to compare the predicted values and their patterns with the
surface map. Another useful step is to remember the criteria used for exploring the data, specially the results
of observing the parameters of the empirical semivariogram.
4.6. Comparing models
Models can be compared by using the option Compare in the surface map layer options. A statistical
criteria used for comparing the best method is to select the one who offers: a) The mean prediction error as
close to zero as possible, b) A root-mean-square standard prediction error close to 1, c) The root-mean-square
error and average standard error as small as possible (Fig. 8). Visual criteria can be to observe if the model
follow the same patterns as the measured sample points.

Fig. 8: Cross validation comparison for two Kriging methods for GRB March 2004: OK-E to the left shows a better behavior than OKS to the right. The average standard errors in both cases are high.

4.7. Predicting data gaps

Data gaps can be predicted with the Validation/Prediction tool of the Kriging layer. A new excel list with
all the stations, including those with data gaps, is added to the map and transformed to a point shapefile. A
visual result is shown in Fig. 7. This shapefile is used as the input data next to the Kriging layer. The result
must be a new point layer which has an attribute table with all the stations and predicted rainfall data as seen
in Fig.9.

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

STATION
EAST
Babahoyo
Balzar
Caluma
Camposano2
El Corazon
Flavio Alfaro
Inmoriec Vergel
Isla Bejucal
La Cancha
La Capilla
La Palizada
Mocache
Murucumba
Nobol
OlmedoManab
Pedernales
Pichilingue
Pilalo
Presa
Puebloviejo
Puerto Ila
Puerto Limon
Rio Congo
San Antonio del Delta Pa
San Juan La Man
StoDomingoAirport
Union 71
Vinces
Zapotal (Los Ros)

NORTH
663179
621542
694159
566617
714141
622159
683167
650581
660527
611696
657185
667564
650866
608748
587791
605098
667951
723122
639272
662200
684847
681399
645203
695073
695182
700326
668655
639054
687140

9801311
9850450
9820519
9823916
9874600
9950129
9913530
9814769
9952918
9812512
9939866
9869861
9900802
9789961
9845685
10006412
9881590
9895638
9898288
9832160
9947365
9957183
9885571
9904015
9898707
9972354
9938481
9828748
9850388

Predicted Precipitation (mm)

314.3
404.6
411.8
259.5
572.3
333.0
335.2
369.1
395.4
284.8
264.2
405.3
356.4
102.4
390.0
315.5
366.2
161.1
197.8
468.7
244.0
283.6
245.8
403.3
443.4
293.5
254.0
372.5
460.9

Fig. 9: GRB Stations with their predicted rainfall data for March 2004. The precipitation values units are in mm.

5. Results and discussion

5.1. Exploring the data, comparison of models and plotting surface maps
Besides prediction surface maps, prediction standard error maps can be seen inside the prediction layer. In
Fig. 10 there is an example for March 2004. Lighter colors represent better accuracy of the data, while darker
colors represent more standard error. It is observed that the prediction standard error surface map is more
related to the concept of semivariogram as seen in section 4.3 and Fig. 5: The closer the group of stations; the
better becomes the predicted values in the surrounding area. Because the concept is more related to distance
and location of stations, the fact that the area beyond Caluma at the southeast is darker is reasonable. That
means that data in that area is by far, the least accurate. This can be seen in Fig. 10.

11

12

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

Fig. 10: Prediction Standard Error map for GRB - March 2004. It is seen that predicted data beyond Caluma to the southeast will not be
accurate.

After doing observations at prediction standard error maps, it is seen in general that better predictions are
made between:
La Cancha, La Palizada, Union 71, Puerto Limon and Puerto Ila.
Presa, Murucumba and Rio Congo.
Pichilingue and Mocache.
San Juan La Man, Pilalo, San Antonio del Delta Pa and El Corazon
Camposano2 and OlmedoManab.
OlmedoManab and Balzar
Balzar and Vinces
La Capilla and Nobol
La Capilla and Vinces
Vinces and Puebloviejo
Babahoyo and Puebloviejo
Zapotal (Los Ros) and Mocache

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

Each one of the three models was compared using the criteria explained in 4.5 and 4.6. The models
depicting better prediction values were: For March 2002: OK-G, 2003: OK-G, 2004: OK-E, 2005: OK-E,
2006: OK-S. After selecting the best model, surface maps are made as seen in Fig. 11.
It can be seen that higher precipitation values can be found in the northern part of the GRB, whereas lower
values were found towards the southwest. That is consistent because there are more vegetation covers in the
northeast up to the Andean foothills. Outcomes from southeast are not good enough due of the reason
explained before (Fig. 10). In general, better interpolation results could have been better if at least two stations
were located in that area.
In March 2002 there was more rainfall than on the next years, especially to the north. Between 2002 and
2003 there is a notable difference of the rainfall at the north of GRB. In 2004 the rainfall is more distributed in
the central area of GRB than other years. In 2005 and 2006 lower precipitation is more distributed at the
southwest, but 2005 has more precipitation values in that same area than 2006.
In March 2003 there was less rainfall than on other years, followed by March 2004.

Fig. 11: Precipitation Surface maps: Top of the figure, from left to right: 2002 to 2004. Down, from left to right: 2005 and 2006.

13

14

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

5.2. Filling data gaps

The next table was computed from the prediction surface maps. Data gaps are marked with yellow.
Table 1: Predicted precipitation values for GRB.
Station

03-2002

03-2003

03-2004

03-2005

03-2006

Babahoyo

561.6

329.5

314.3

282.2

378.2

Balzar

480.2

041.7

404.6

208.8

321.0

Caluma

791.1

236.3

411.8

345.5

603.6

Camposano2

487.2

123.3

259.5

295.6

311.9

El Corazon

724.4

323.8

572.3

264.0

542.7

Flavio Alfaro

343.4

215.0

333.0

154.5

445.1

Inmoriec Vergel

1151.0

352.7

335.2

342.9

697.1

Isla Bejucal

709.4

316.4

369.1

321.4

354.0

La Cancha

54.2

159.6

395.4

508.0

575.7

La Capilla

657.9

153.3

284.8

306.5

229.9

La Palizada

312.0

77.1

264.2

469.8

604.8

Mocache

713.7

210.7

405.3

253.4

462.3

Mucurumba

760.8

265.9

356.4

232.2

529.7

Nobol

581.3

159.6

102.4

84.7

239.8

Olmedo Manab

550.3

186.1

390.0

381.4

387.1

Pedernales

379.5

180.5

315.5

458.6

537.9

Pichilingue

722.6

281.9

366.2

191.9

528.4

Pilalo

233.0

188.8

161.1

152.2

386.9

Presa

569.3

242.7

197.8

230.6

557.7

Puebloviejo

593.1

309.4

468.7

377.3

421.5

Puerto Ila

776.5

263.1

244.0

515.0

706.2

Puerto Limon

302.8

257.2

283.6

787.9

677.5

Rio Congo

10.6

237.4

245.8

307.0

580.2

San Antonio del Delta Pa

994.3

400.6

403.3

306.8

723.8

San Juan La Mana

1003.1

413.0

443.4

307.7

752.4

StoDomingoAirport

255.8

244.0

293.5

600.9

690.4

Union71

569.6

155.0

254.0

468.4

749.0

Vinces

844.6

249.3

372.5

361.0

291.5

Zapotal (Los Rios)

1043.5

135.1

460.9

437.0

499.6

March 2002 was the month with the most accumulated precipitation from all the stations. March 2003 was
the month with the least accumulated precipitation from all the stations. While Pilalo was the station with
the least accumulated precipitation, San Juan La Mana had the most during all the analyzed periods.
On March 2002, Rio Congo was the station with the least value of precipitation while Inmoriec Vergel
had the highest value.

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

The Inmoriec Vergel measurement location had the highest variability in terms of rainfall. On the other
hand, Pilalo had the most uniform precipitation values.
It can be seen that results could have an error. That error is given by the Kriging method and the procedure
can be refined by having more stations, so the error can be diminished.
6. Conclusions and recommendations
Geostatistical methods can be more or less accurate than deterministic methods depending of the variables
taken into account. Deterministic methods as Inverse Distance Weighting rely only on distance. Geostatistical
methods depend on many factors as the spatial relationship between data stations, elevation and environment
behavior.
The advantage of using Kriging methods is that not only the weight for each point is computed, but also
the errors of each weight based on a hypothetical model: a mathematical description of spatial distribution of
rainfall. Those errors are computed thanks to statistics in a way that not only surface prediction maps can be
made as the deterministic methods, but also standard error surface maps: an exclusive feature of geostatistical
methods.
Kriging prediction surface maps can be combined with their standard error maps. This combination can be
useful in a way that not only the precipitation is estimated, but also the reliability of the prediction can be
computed and visually seen.
The empirical semivariogram can be fitted better to any model with the help of iterations of the weighted
least squares criteria. But the fitting depends mainly of the number of stations and observations of phenomena
behavior. That means that the best fitting of a model can be done with the least squares method, but not
always the fittest model gives a better definition of reality. It is recommended having at least sixty measured
stations before Kriging.
For the case of study, the comparison of model semivariograms showed that the Gaussian semivariogram
and the Exponential semivariogram described better the spatial relationship of data. The fact the Gaussian
semivariogram formula is similar to the Exponential one can be related to the random function, in this case,
rainfall.
Spatial distribution of rainfall at Guayas River Basin on March can be described with higher precipitation
values at north and northeast, and lower values to the south, closer to the mouth of the basin. There are cases
as March 2004 that the rainfall is distributed more uniformly from the central area with the highest values, to
the north and south with lower values. This is related with characteristics of the Guayas River Basin as
vegetation covers and forests closer to Santo Domingo or being close to the Andean foothills, giving
orographic rainfall as a result in those zones (From North to East).
It was observed that characteristics of the analyzed zone as elevation and vegetation play an important role
in spatial interpolation of rainfall. This is the basis of other types of Kriging. It is suggested that the study
could also be conducted for other types of Kriging as Universal Kriging, Kriging with External Drift and CoKriging as long as sufficient measurement stations are available (around 60).
Investigation of the influence of data transformation and trend removals in Kriging methods could also be
carried out. A comparison between deterministic and geostatistical methods, like IDW with Kriging can be
done in future research, observing the effects of the number of analyzed stations.

15

16

Anton, Cardenas, Freire, Moreira/ Geostatistical Interpolation of rainfall

7. References
Arnell, N.W. C. Liu, R. Compagnucci, L. da Cunha, K. Hanaki, C. Howe, G. Mailu, I Shiklomanov and E. Stakhiv, 2001: Hydrology and
water resources. Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Third
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, J.J. McCarthy, O.F. Canziani, N.A. Leary, D.J. Dokken and
K.S. White, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 191-234.
Carr, J., & Glass, C. (1989). Use of Geostatistics For Accurate Mapping of Earthquake Ground Motion. Geophysical Journal
International, 97(1), 31-40.
Cressie, N. (1985). Fitting variogram models by weighted least squares. Journal of the International Association for Mathematical
Geology, 17(5), 563-586.
David, M., & Blais, R. A. (1972). Geostatistical Ore Reserve Estimation. Application of computer methods in the mineral industry:
Proceedings of the tenth International Symposium, Johannesburg, 10th April-14th April, 1972. Johannesburg: South African
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 27-34.
Goovaerts, P. (1999). Using elevation to aid the geostatistical mapping of rainfall erosivity. CATENA, 34(3), 227-242.
Ly, S., Charles, C., & Degre, A. (2011). Geostatistical interpolation of daily rainfall at catchment scale: the use of several variogram
models in the Ourthe and Ambleve catchments, Belgium. Hydrology & Earth System Sciences, 15(7).
Matheron, G. (1969). Cours de geostatistique. Paris: L Ecole national sup rieure des mines de Paris.
Raghunath, H. (2006). Hydrology principles, analysis and design (Rev. 2nd ed.). New Delhi: New Age International (P).