Correction

 notice  
 
Nature  Geosci.  6,  742–745  (2013);  published  online  4  August  2013.  
 
Rising  river  flows  throughout  the  twenty-­‐first  century  in  two  Himalayan  
glacierized  watersheds  
W.  W.  Immerzeel,  F.  Pellicciotti  &  M.  F.  P.  Bierkens  
 
In  the  version  of  this  Supplementary  Information  file  originally  published,  in  Table  S1,  
the  labels  Baltoro  and  Langtang  were  swapped.  In  addition,  the  ‘WET,COLD’  and  
‘WET,WARM’  scenarios  for  the  Baltoro  catchment  were  swapped.  This  has  all  been  
corrected  in  this  file  on  26  September  2013.  
 Rising river flows throughout the 21st century
SUPPLEMENTARY in two
INFORMATION
Himalayan glacierised watersheds DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896

Rising river flows throughout the twenty-first

century in twoSupplementary
Himalayan information
glacierized watersheds
W.W. Immerzeel1,2, F. Pellicciotti2, M.F.P. Bierkens1,3

1
Utrecht University, Department of Physical Geography, PO Box 80115, Utrecht, The Netherlands,
w.w.immerzeel@uu.nl

2
ETH Zurich, Institute of Environmental Engineering, Hydrology and Water Resources Management,
Wolfgang-Pauli-Str. 15, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland

3
Deltares, PO Box 85467, 3508 AL Utrecht, The Netherlands

1
NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 1
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896

Study area

We apply a high resolution glacio-hydrological model in two watersheds allegedly contrasting in

climate and morphology: the Langtang watershed in the upper Ganges basin and the Baltoro watershed
in the upper Indus (Figure 1).

The Langtang watershed has an area of 360 km2 and is located in Nepal, approximately 100 km north
of Kathmandu (Figure 1) in the Greater Himalaya. The elevation ranges from 3800 m.a.s.l. up to the
peak of Langtang Lirung at 7234 m.a.s.l. with an average elevation of 5169 m.a.s.l. In total 46% (166
km2) of the watershed is glacierised. The average glacier size is 2.0 km2 and the largest glacier
(Langtang glacier) has a surface area of 59.0 km2 (ref. 1). The glacier tongues below 5200 m.a.s.l. are
generally debris covered (32 km2). The Langtang River flows through the main valley, which is
typically U-shaped. The climate is dominated by monsoon circulation with predominant easterly
winds in the summer and westerly winds from October to May. More than 70% of annual precipitation
(814 mm y−1) falls during the monsoon season from June to September (mean over period from 1957
to 2002). From June to August precipitation occurs almost every day. In the later part of the monsoon
season (September to October) the maximum daily amount is considerably higher than in June to
August, while the number of rainy days decreases gradually compared to the previous months. During
the dry season (November to May), precipitation (mainly snow) occurs on only a few days, as it is
produced by the occasional passage of westerly troughs2. In general, the precipitation amounts
increase with altitude during both the monsoon and the dry season3. The Langtang is characterized by
synchronous accumulation and ablation during the monsoon season.

The Baltoro watershed has an area of 1415 km2 and is located in Pakistan about 70 km north-east of
Skardu. Its elevation ranges from 3173 m.a.s.l. to the summit of K2 at 8611 m.a.s.l. In total 46% of the
watershed is glacierised (680 km2). The average glacier size is 8.0 km2 and the largest glacier (Baltoro
glacier) has a surface area of 631 km2, inclusive of its main tributaries. Valley precipitation is about
300 mm y-1, but there is mounting evidence of strong vertical lapse rates4,5. The Baltoro watershed
experiences a weak monsoon influence, but receives about 50% of its annual precipitation from
westerlies during winter. In the Karakoram ablation occurs during summer and most accumulation
occurs during the winter months.

Data

We used the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM3) digital elevation model (DEM) at a spatial
resolution of 90 meter6 to set up the model for both watersheds. The SRTM DEM is used to derive the
local drainage direction, redistribute snow due to avalanching, model the flow of ice and generate
spatial fields of precipitation (P) and temperature (T) based on altitude-dependent lapse rates.

We used glacier outlines derived from Landsat remote sensing imagery around the year 2003 to
calibrate the glacier flow model1. The glacier outlines are delineated using a combination of object
oriented and pixel based classification and manual corrections for debris covered glaciers1.

Long-term hydro-meteorological observations at high altitude in Asia are scarce. We used a

combination of local meteorological observations and reanalysis data to generate a reference time
series of data from 1 September 1957 until 31 October 2009. This was used for calibration of the
glacio-hydrological model. For the Langtang watershed we used observed data from 2001 until 2007
at the station of Kyangjin (3850 m.a.s.l.). For the Baltoro watershed we used data from the stations of
2 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience
2
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Urdukas (3927 m.a.s.l.) and Askole (3015 m.a.s.l.) from 2004 until 2007. We use the observed data
series of P and T to perform a monthly bias correction on the ERA-Interim7 data from 1989 until 2009
and we then use the overlapping period (1989 – 2002) of the bias corrected ERA Interim time series to
correct the ERA40 dataset8 and extend our time series back to 1957. The grid cell in which the station
was located was used to extract the ERA-interim time series. The final result is a bias-corrected daily
time series from 1 September 1957 until 31 October 2009. We repeat this time series twice and run the
model for each watershed once to generate plausible initial ice conditions.

We use temperature and precipitation lapse rates in combination with the SRTM3 DEM to derive
spatial fields at the model resolution of 90m. In both cases the temperature lapse rates were calibrated.
For the Langtang, precipitation lapse rates and horizontal gradients were based on field observations
collected during a field campaign in 2012. For the Baltoro, the precipitation lapse rate was derived by
using the average glacier mass balance as a proxy for precipitation4. The model parameter values are
shown in Table S2.

The hydrological parameters are calibrated using observed discharge at the outlet of the Langtang
watershed for 2000-2006.

Climate change projections and downscaling

Model selection

Future climate scenarios were estimated based on the latest results of a recent set of general circulation
model (GCM) simulations, the CMIP5 multi-model ensemble9. These results are also used for the
upcoming 5th assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We
analysed all available CMIP5 simulations for two emission scenarios: RCP4.5 (43 model runs) and
RCP8.5 (41 model runs). We extracted time series of daily temperature and precipitation for both the
Baltoro and the Langtang watershed at the grid cell in which the meteorological station is located. For
each RCP and for each watershed we then selected four models spanning the entire range from dry and
cold, wet and cold, dry and warm to wet and warm. This selection was based on the 10th (dry, cold)
and 90th (wet, warm) percentile values for the average annual projected changes in precipitation (%)
and temperature (°C) during 2021-2050 relative to 1961-1990. The model runs closest to the percentile
values were selected. An example of the model selection procedure is shown for the Baltoro for
RCP4.5 in Figure S1.

3
dT ( C)

1 All model runs

Selected models
Q10, Q90 values
0
-20 -10 0 10 20
dP (%)

Figure S1 Model selection for the Baltoro watershed. for RCP45. dP is the projected change in precipitation and dT is
the projected change in temperature.

NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 3

3
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896

The details of the selected model runs are provided in Table S1.

Table S1 Overview of selected model runs used in the glacio-hydrological simulations. dPs, dTs are the projected
average annual changes in precipitation and temperature in 2021-2050 relative to 1961-1990. The values in brackets
are the 10th percentiles of dPs for dry model runs and of dTs for cold runs, and correspondingly the 90th percentiles
for wet runs and warm runs. More details of the models, modelling centres and meaning of the ensemble codes can be
found at http://cmip-pcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/availability.html.

Baltoro
Description RCP ID dPs (%) dTs (°C) Model Ensemble
DRY, COLD 4.5 1 -4.4 (-6.5) 2.0 (1.6) NorESM1-M r1i1p1
DRY, WARM 4.5 2 -6.0 (-6.5) 2.9 (2.8) ISPL-CM5A-LR r2i1p1
WET, COLD 4.5 3 9.7 (10.9) 1.8 (1.6) CCSM4 r5i1p1
WET, WARM 4.5 4 10.1 (10.9) 2.8 (2.8) CAN-ESM2 r1i1p1
DRY, COLD 8.5 5 -1.9 (-4.0) 2.2 (1.9) NORESM1-M r1i1p1
DRY, WARM 8.5 6 -3.7 (-4.0) 3.1 (3.2) GFDL-CM3 r1i1p1
WET, COLD 8.5 7 10.2 (13.5) 1.7 (1.9) MRI-CGCM3 r1i1p1
WET, WARM 8.5 8 13.9 (13.5) 3.2 (3.2) CAN-ESM2 r1i1p1
Langtang
DRY, COLD 4.5 1 -3.2 (-4.2) 1.5 (1.4) HADGEM2-CC r1i1p1
DRY, WARM 4.5 2 -2.3 (-4.2) 2.4 (2.6) MIROC-ESM r1i1p1
WET, COLD 4.5 3 12.4 (12.7) 1.3 (1.4) MRI-CGCM3 r1i1p1
WET, WARM 4.5 4 12.1 (12.7) 2.4 (2.6) IPSL-CM5A-LR r3i1p1
DRY, COLD 8.5 5 -3.6 (-2.1) 1.7 (1.7) HADGEM2-CC r1i1p1
DRY, WARM 8.5 6 -2.8 (-2.1) 3.1 (3.0) IPSL-CM5A-LR r2i1p1
WET, COLD 8.5 7 15.6 (16.2) 1.8 (1.7) CSIRO-MK3-60 r1i1p1
WET, WARM 8.5 8 16.4 (16.2) 2.9 (3.0) CAN-ESM2 r2i1p1

Empirical statistical downscaling

The GCM model outputs are characterized by significant errors and biases. This limits their direct
utilization in climate change impact research. First we downloaded daily time series for the grid cells
nearest to Urdukas (Baltoro) and Kyangjin (Langtang) for both the control (1961-1990) and the future
period (2008–2100) from the CMIP5 database (http://pcmdi9.llnl.gov/). We then used a quantile based
empirical statistical downscaling technique10 to generate daily time series from 2008 until 2100 for
each of the selected models for both watersheds. We use the following correction functions

() ( ) (1.)

( ) ( ( )) (2.)

where xr,i is the raw GCM output in the future on day i, F is the cumulative empirical distribution
function (cdf) for a certain month m during the control period 1961-1990 for either the observations
(obs) or the GCM (gcm), p is the probability and xc,i is the corrected GCM output on day i. In those
cases where xr,i is outside the observed range during the control period we use the following correction
function in the case of precipitation (3.) and temperature (4.) respectively.

(3.)
4 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience
4
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
( ) (4.)

where max is the maximum during the control period 1961-1990. The same approach applies when xr,i
is below the minimum of the GCM output during the control period for a specific month. The
approach ensures that both systematic biases and the variability are corrected on a monthly time basis
and it allows the generation of “new” extremes when future GCM outputs are outside the range of the
control period. Another advantage of this approach is that it corrects for the “drizzle” effect, which is a
common problem with GCM output11, because we derive the probability from the cdf of the GCM and
we sample the corrected value from the observed cdf. This assures that the wet day frequency is also
corrected appropriately. The drizzle effect is a result of the coarse resolution and the limited cloud
microphysics of many GCMs which cause a tendency to simulate too long rain periods with too low
intensity.

Glacio-hydrological model

Description of key processes

We use a high resolution (90 meter) glacio-hydrological model, which was recently developed12 and
which has been further improved for this study. The model simulates glacier ablation and
accumulation together with an explicit representation of glacier movement, in combination with major
hydrological processes such as evapotranspiration, surface runoff, ablation and groundwater base flow
with a daily time step.

Snow and ice melt is calculated with a degree-day approach. The degree-day factor ddf, however, is
not uniform in space but depends on aspect and in case of glaciers on the type of surface. Debris
covered glaciers are insulated by debris layers thicker than a few centimetres and melt at a lower rate
than clean ice glaciers13,14. Field measurements on the Baltoro glacier for example have confirmed the
theoretical evidence that melt rates are a clear function of debris thickness15. This effect is important to
take into account, despite not being entirely understood at the glacier scale in Greater Himalaya. Note
that glacier melt is all melt occurring on the glacierised parts of the watersheds. We have not made a
distinction between the ddf of snow and ice, because of the lack of a snow maturation model. It would
be recommendable to develop such a model for the future and further improve the mass balance
approach under data scarce conditions.

On south faces, the incident shortwave radiation is higher and thus we assume a larger ddf than on
north faces16. The aspect dependence of the ddf is calculated as

ddfc = ddf∙(1 - Rexp∙cos(aspect)) (5.)

where ddfc is the corrected ddf and Rexp is a factor quantifying the aspect dependence of the ddf.

Snow accumulation feeds the glacier and precipitation fields are generated by lapsing the station
precipitation using a DEM and precipitation lapse rates. The snow and rain partitioning is performed
on the basis of the temperature fields.

The model used in ref(12) ignored gravitational snow transport processes and as a result glacier
nourishment as a result of avalanching was underestimated. This is problematic especially in glacier
systems with steep valley sides. We have therefore improved the model by including a module for
NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 5
5
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896

gravitational snow transport17. The approach assumes that all snow in a given cell is transported to the
downstream cell with the steepest slope whenever snow holding depth (Shd) and a minimum slope
angle (Sm) is exceeded. The Shd is high in flat areas and low in steep areas and decreased exponentially
with increasing slope angle. The Sm is set to 22° and the relation between slope angle and Shd is
shown in Figure S217.

40

30
Shd(m)

20

10

0
0 20 Slope ( ) 40 60

Figure S2 Relation between slope and snow holding depth17. The red line shows the position of the minimum slope
angle above which gravitational slope transport occurs.

As the snow and ice progressively moves downstream, the temperature increases and snow and ice
ablation (Qa) is simulated using the corrected degree-day factor (ddfc). A fraction (α) of the total
ablation leaves the watershed as runoff, while the remainder of the ablation (1- α) is stored in the
glacier/snow pack and is released as base flow, which is modelled similar to groundwater base flow
using an exponential recession curve similar to the SWAT model18.

For the ice-dynamics we assume that the principal process for glacial movement is basal sliding,
where glacier bottom motion is modelled as a combination of regelation and basal creep leading to
Weertman’s sliding law19:

2
 b   2 Run1 (6.)

where τb is the basal shear stress (Pa), ν (-) is a measure of the roughness of the bedrock, R is a
material roughness coefficient (Pa s1/3), u is the sliding speed (m s-1) and n (-) is the creep constant of
Glen’s flow law (~3 in most cases) (Glen, 1952). The driving force of glacier movement is gravity and
τb can therefore be defined as

 b  gH sin( ) (7.)

where  (kg m-3) is the ice density, g is the gravitational acceleration (m s-2), H (m) is the ice
thickness and  (°) is the surface slope. By combining Eq. 6 and Eq. 7 under the assumption that
glaciers only move when the basal shear stress exceeds the equilibrium shear stress (τ0 = 80000 N m-2
12
) the glacier speed can be derived

2
gH sin(  )   0
u n1  (8.)
 2R
By modelling glacier speed with equation (8.) we do not consider internal creep or deformation.
However, simulating large compound glacier systems for multiple runs for many decades, as done in
6 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience
6
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
this study, requires a simple (in terms of parameterisation efforts and calculation effort) yet
sufficiently realistic model. Weertman’s velocity model meets these requirements, as is also shown in
the calibration and validation section hereafter.

Equation (8.) is used to model glacier movement as a function of slope, ice thickness and bedrock
properties for each daily time step for each cell. Snow accumulates in the upstream parts of the
watershed and at each time step the sliding speed is calculated for each cell. Based on the sliding speed
the ice is transported down the digital elevation model. We calculate the local slope (magnitude and
direction). From this and the sliding speed follows the velocity vector (magnitude size and direction),
which is subsequently decomposed into the different downstream directions.

For those pixels that are glacierised according to the glacier inventory1, the initial ice thickness of each
pixel at the onset of the simulation is estimated by:

0
H (9.)
g sin( )
In determining the initial ice thickness we use a minimum slope of 2% at this resolution and the
maximum slope does not exceed 98% in both watersheds.

Calibration and partial validation

We use the parameter estimation (PEST) software20 in a two stage calibration procedure. First we
calibrated the parameters related to glacier flow. We calibrated the modelled ice extent against the ice
extent observed with high resolution remote sensing. First we derive an initial ice thickness as
described in Immerzeel et al. (2012)12 and during the parameter optimization we repeat the period
1957 – 2009 twice to ensure a relatively stable result. The results of the calibration of the ice
parameters are shown in Figure S3. In general the calibration results are highly satisfactory, but some
artefacts are observed for the two glacier systems in the north-western corner of the Langtang
watershed. Both Lirung and Khymoshung are non-typical glaciers for which our model
parameterization may not perform as well as for the majority of other glaciers. The Lirung glacier has
an extremely steep cirque-like accumulation zone which is detached from the glacier tongue, whereas
the Khymoshung glacier has a large and flat accumulation zone and the tongue is a very steep ice fall
for which Weertman’s sliding law may not hold.

NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 7

7
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896

Figure S3 The maps show the simulated ice thickness for Baltoro (left) and Langtang (right) after calibration of the
model melt parameters . The black polygons are the glacier outlines derived from remote sensing.

As independent validation we compare the simulated ice velocity field in the Baltoro watershed with a
velocity field derived from radar imagery using cross correlation feature tracking21 in Figure S4. Both
show the same order of magnitude and spatial patterns, confirming that the ice flow model is capable
of simulating realistic flow speeds.

Figure S4 Simulated ice velocity (right) and ice velocity derived by cross correlation feature tracking using 6 pairs of
ERS1-2 and Envisat ASAR radar imagery21 (left) for the period 2003-2008.

Secondly the hydrological parameters are optimized using discharge observations. Figure S5 shows
the results of the hydrological calibration from 2000 until 2006 for the Langtang watershed. The Nash-
Sutcliffe criterion for model efficiency equals 0.95, the Pearson correlation coefficient equals 0.93, the
root mean square error equals 1.4 m3 s-1 and there is a slight positive bias of 4.3%. Discharge
observations are only available for the Langtang and we therefore transfer the hydrological parameters
to the Baltoro. The potential impact of transferring parameters on model uncertainty is likely to be
much less than the impact of climate change scenarios22. An overview with the parameters used is
shown in Table S2.

Further details on the model and parameterizations can be found in Immerzeel et al. (2012)12.

8 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience

8
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Figure S5. Observed and simulated streamflow at the watershed outlet of the Langtang watershed.

Table S2 Key model parameters

Parameter Description Units Baltoro Langtang Source

Ice parameters
DDF Degree day factor mm °C day-1 8.7 6.2 Calibrated
Rdebris Multiplicative factor for the DDF for - 0.4 0.3 Calibrated
debris covered glaciers
λp,v Vertical precipitation lapse rate % m-1 0.21 0.043 Observed (LT),
Derived based on
glacier proxy (BT)

λp,h Precipitation gradient (positive % m-1 - -0.00089 Observed

westward)
Hmax Elevation with peak precipitation m asl 5500 4830 Calibrated
λt Temperature lapse rate °C m -1
-0.0060 -0.0065 Calibrated
R Material roughness coefficient Nm s-2 1/3
1.24E+09 2.30E+09 Calibrated
Hydrological parameters
1
CN Curve number - 98 98 Calibrated
θ Maximum soil water storage m 0.8 0.8 Calibrated
capacity
αg Runoff fraction of glacier ablation - 0.37 0.37 Calibrated
αs Runoff fraction of snow ablation - 0.95 0.95 Calibrated

1
The surface runoff is simulated using the curve number method similar to the Soil Water Assessment Tool 18

NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 9

9
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896

Supplemental tables

Table S3 Basic features of the major river basins. A = area, AUS = percentage of the total basin area with an elevation

> 2000 m asl., GA = glacier area23, GAR = Percentage glacierised area, PDS = downstream (< 2000 m asl)

precipitation24, PUS = upstream (> 2000 m asl) precipitation24, JJAS-US = percentage of upstream precipitation

falling during the monsoon (June until September)24, T5000 = average annual near-surface air temperature at 5000 m

asl25.

A AUS GA GAR PDS PUS JJAS-US T5000

6 2 2 -1 -1
10 km % km % mm y mm y % °C
Syr Darya 1.12 11.3 1774 0.16 202 395 31 -11.9
Amu Darya 0.80 26.4 14816 1.85 153 267 20 -7.7
Indus 1.01 40.5 27126 2.70 350 346 40 -3.1
Ganges 0.99 13.7 11202 1.13 997 900 75 -3.0
Brahmaputra 0.52 66.0 17070 3.26 2227 573 71 -0.9
Irrawaddy 0.40 5.1 44 0.01 1205 1319 55 -3.8
Salween 0.36 31.2 2247 0.62 1344 595 69 -3.1
Mekong 0.78 13.3 379 0.05 1442 642 71 -4.4
Yangtze 2.06 29.3 2833 0.14 1129 657 73 -4.3
Yellow 1.01 28.9 332 0.03 381 444 72 -8.3

10 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience

10
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Supplemental figures

4.0 20

3.0
10

dP (%)
dT ( C)

2.0
0
1.0

0.0 -10

SD
AD

GA
BR

SA

YA
YE
ME
IN

IR
SD
AD

GA
BR

SA

YA
YE
ME
IN

IR

4.0 20

3.0
10
dP (%)
dT ( C)

2.0
0
1.0

0.0 -10 SD
AD

GA
BR

SA

YA
YE
ME
IN

IR
SD
AD

GA
BR

SA

YA
YE
ME
IN

IR

Figure S6 Projected changes in temperature (left) and precipitation (right) for the period 2021-2050 relative to 1961-
1990 for RCP85. The error bars depict the standard deviation of 41 different CMIP5 RCP85 runs.

NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 11

11
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896

250 BT - 1961-1990 250 LT - 1961-1990 Surface runoff

Baseflow
200 200
Snow
Q (mm month-1)

Q (mm month-1)
Glacier
150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Figure S7 Monthly contribution to total runoff from 1961-1990 for the Baltoro (BT, left) and the Langtang watershed
(LT, right). Snow and Glacier indicate snow and glacier melt runoff, respectively. All values are expressed as a
watershed average in mm month-1.

12 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience

12
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
400 10
P BT
P LT
T-BT 0
300 T-LT

-10
P (mm)

T5000 ( C)
200
-20

100
-30

0 -40
jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

Figure S8 Average monthly watershed precipitation (P) and temperature at 5000 m asl (T) for the Baltoro (BT) and
the Langtang (LT) from 1961-1990.

13
NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 13
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896

1500 1500 RCP85, M5

RCP45, M1
1200 1200

Q (mm yr-1)
Q (mm yr-1)

900 900

600 600

300 300

0 0
1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100 1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100

1500 1500 RCP85, M6

RCP45, M2
1200 1200

Q (mm yr-1)
Q (mm yr-1)

900 900

600 600

300 300

0 0
1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100 1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100

1500 RCP45, M3 1500 RCP85, M7

1200 1200
Q (mm yr-1)
Q (mm yr-1)

900 900

600 600

300 300

0 0
1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100 1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100

1500 RCP45, M4 1500 RCP85, M8

1200 1200
Q (mm yr-1)

Q (mm yr-1)

Surface runoff
900 900
Baseflow
600 600 Snow
300 300 Glacier

0 0
1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100 1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100

Figure S9 Contribution to total simulated runoff (Q) in the Baltoro for three different time slices for four RCP45 and
four RCP85 model runs (Table S1). All values are expressed as a watershed average in mm yr-1.

14 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience

14
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
1500 RCP45, R1 1500 RCP85, R5
1200 1200
Q (mm yr-1)

Q (mm yr-1)
900 900

600 600

300 300

0 0
1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100 1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100

1500 RCP45, R2 1500 RCP85, R6

1200 1200
Q (mm yr-1)

Q (mm yr-1)
900 900

600 600

300 300

0 0
1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100 1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100

1500 RCP45, R3 1500 RCP85, R7

1200 1200
Q (mm yr-1)
Q (mm yr-1)

900 900

600 600

300 300

0 0
1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100 1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100

1500 RCP45, R4 1500

RCP85, R8
1200 1200
Q (mm yr-1)

Q (mm yr-1)

900 900 Surface runoff

Baseflow
600 600
Snow
300 300
Glacier
0 0
1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100 1961-1990 2021-2050 2071-2100

Figure S10 Contribution to total simulated runoff (Q) in the Langtang for three different time slices for four RCP45
and four RCP85 model runs (Table S1). All values are expressed as a watershed average in mm yr-1.

NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 15

15
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896

140 BT - RCP45 - 2021-2050 140 LT - RCP45 - 2021-2050

120 120

100 100
ΔQ (mm month-1)

ΔQ (mm month-1)
80 80

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
-20 -20

140 BT - RCP45 - 2071-2100 140 LT - RCP45 - 2071-2100

120 120

100 100
ΔQ (mm month-1)

ΔQ (mm month-1)
80 80

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
-20 -20

140 BT - RCP85 - 2021 - 2050 140 LT - RCP85 - 2021-2050

120 120

100 100
ΔQ (mm month-1)

ΔQ (mm month-1)

80 80

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
-20 -20

140 BT - RCP85 - 2071-2100 140 LT - RCP85 - 2071-2100 Surface runoff

120 120 Baseflow

100 100 Snow

ΔQ (mm month-1)

ΔQ (mm month-1)

Glacier
80 80

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
-20 -20

Figure S11 Changes in the average contribution to total simulated runoff (Q) for 2021-2050 and 2071-2100 for RCP45
and RCP85 in the Baltoro watershed (BT, left) and the Langtang watershed (LT, right). All values are relative to
1961-1990 and averaged for the four GCMs per RCP. All values are expressed as a watershed average in mm month-1.

16 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience

16
DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
References

1. Bajracharya, S. R. & Shrestha, B. The Status of Glaciers in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan Region.
(Kathmandu, 2011).

2. Wang, B. The Asian Monsoon. (Springer: Heidelberg, 2006).

3. Seko, K. Seasonal variation of altitudinal dependence of precipitation in Langtang Valley,

Nepal Himalayas. Bulletin of Glacier Research 5, 41–47 (1987).

4. Immerzeel, W. W., Pellicciotti, F. & Shrestha, A. B. Glaciers as a proxy to quantify the spatial
distribution of precipitation in the Hunza basin. Mountain Research and Development 32, 30–
38 (2012).

5. Winiger, M., Gumpert, M. & Yamout, H. Karakorum-Hindukush-western Himalaya: assessing

high-altitude water resources. Hydrological Processes 19, 2329–2338 (2005).

6. Zyl, J. J. Van The shuttle radar topography mission (SRTM): a breakthrough in remote sensing
of topography. Acta Astronautica 48, 559–565 (2001).

7. Dee, D. P. et al. The ERA-Interim reanalysis: configuration and performance of the data
assimilation system. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 137, 553–597
(2011).

8. Uppala, S. M. et al. The ERA-40 re-analysis. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological
Society 131, 2961–3012 (2005).

9. Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J. & Meehl, G. A. An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment
design. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 93, 485–498 (2012).

10. Themeßl, M. J., Gobiet, A. & Heinrich, G. Empirical-statistical downscaling and error
correction of regional climate models and its impact on the climate change signal. Climatic
Change 112, 449–468 (2011).

11. Gutowksi, W. J. et al. Temporal–spatial scales of observed and simulated precipitation in

central U.S. climate. Journal of Climate 16, 3841–3847 (2003).

12. Immerzeel, W. W., Beek, L. P. H., Konz, M., Shrestha, a. B. & Bierkens, M. F. P. Hydrological
response to climate change in a glacierized catchment in the Himalayas. Climatic Change 110,
721–736 (2012).

13. Nicholson, L. & Benn, D. I. Calculating ice melt beneath a debris layer using meteorological
data. Journal of Glaciology 52, 463–470 (2006).

14. Reid, T. D. & Brock, B. W. An energy-balance model for debris-covered glaciers including
heat conduction through the debris layer. Journal of Glaciology 56, 903–916 (2010).

15. Mihalcea, C. et al. Ice ablation and meteorological conditions on the debris-covered area of
Baltoro glacier , Karakoram , Pakistan. Annals Of Glaciology 292–300 (2006).

16. Konz, M., Uhlenbrook, S., Braun, L., Shrestha, A. & Demuth, S. Implementation of a process-
based catchment model in a poorly gauged, highly glacierized Himalayan headwater.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 11, 1323–1339 (2007).
NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 17
17
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1896

17. Bernhardt, M. & Schulz, K. SnowSlide: A simple routine for calculating gravitational snow
transport. Geophysical Research Letters 37, 1–6 (2010).

18. Neitsch, S. L., Arnold, J. G., Kiniry, J. R. & Williams, J. R. Soil and Water Assessment Tool:
Theoretical Documentation. (Agricultural Research Service: Temple, 2005).

19. Weertman, J. On the sliding of glaciers. Journal of Glaciology 3, 33–38 (1957).

20. Doherty, J. PEST: Model Independent Parameter Estimation: user manual. (Watermark
Numerical Computing: Brisbane, 2005).

21. Quincey, D. J. et al. Ice velocity and climate variations for Baltoro Glacier , Pakistan. Weather
55, 1061–1071 (2009).

22. Immerzeel, W. W., Van Beek, L. P. H. & Bierkens, M. F. P. Climate change will affect the
Asian water towers. Science 328, 1382–1385 (2010).

23. Arendt, A. et al. Randolph Glacier Inventory 2.0: A Dataset of Global Glacier Outlines. 1–35
(Boulder, Colorado, USA, 2012).

24. Yatagai, A. et al. APHRODITE : constructing a long-term daily gridded precipitation dataset
for Asia based on a dense network of rain gauges. Geophysical Research Abstracts 14, (2012).

25. Sheffield, J., Goteti, G. & Wood, E. F. Development of a 50-year high-resolution global dataset
of meteorological forcings for land surface modeling. Journal of Climate 19, 3088–3111
(2006).

18 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience

18