This study provides guidance to hydrological
researchers which enables them to provide probabilistic predictions of daily
streamflow with the best reliability and precision for different catchment
types (e.g. high/low degree of ephemerality). Reliable and precise
probabilistic prediction of daily catchment-scale streamflow requires
statistical characterization of residual errors of hydrological models. It is
commonly known that hydrological model residual errors are heteroscedastic,
i.e. there is a pattern of larger errors in higher streamflow predictions.
Although multiple approaches exist for representing this heteroscedasticity,
few if any studies have undertaken a comprehensive evaluation and comparison of
these approaches. This study fills this research gap by evaluating 8 common
residual error schemes, including standard and weighted least squares, the
Box-Cox transformation (with fixed and calibrated power parameter, lambda) and
the log-sinh transformation. Case studies include 17 perennial and 6 ephemeral
catchments in Australia and USA, and two lumped hydrological models. We find
the choice of heteroscedastic error modelling approach significantly impacts on
predictive performance, though no single scheme simultaneously optimizes all
performance metrics. The set of Pareto optimal schemes, reflecting performance
trade-offs, comprises Box-Cox schemes with lambda of 0.2 and 0.5, and the log
scheme (lambda=0, perennial catchments only). These schemes significantly
outperform even the average-performing remaining schemes (e.g., across
ephemeral catchments, median precision tightens from 105% to 40% of observed
streamflow, and median biases decrease from 25% to 4%). Theoretical
interpretations of empirical results highlight the importance of capturing the
skew/kurtosis of raw residuals and reproducing zero flows. Recommendations for
researchers and practitioners seeking robust residual error schemes for
practical work are provided