IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v182y2017icp55-66.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling rice evapotranspiration under water-saving irrigation by calibrating canopy resistance model parameters in the Penman-Monteith equation

Author

Listed:
  • Xu, Junzeng
  • Liu, Xiaoyin
  • Yang, Shihong
  • Qi, Zhiming
  • Wang, Yijiang

Abstract

A canopy-resistance-based Penman-Monteith (PM) model’s performance in estimating rice evapotranspiration (ET) under water-saving irrigation (WSI) condition at hourly and daily intervals was evaluated. To improve the performance of Jarvis-type canopy-resistance model in calculating rice ET under water-saving irrigation condition with Penman-Monteith (PM) model, a term of effective leaf area index was used to reflect the influence of canopy coverage condition, and field capacity was replace by saturated soil moisture (θs) in soil water response functions due to the specific field moisture condition in WSI rice fields. Two years of hourly rice ET measured using eddy covariance (EThEC) with energy balance closure adjustment served to calibrate (2014 data) and validate (2015 data) a canopy-resistance-based PM model. Results indicate that the PM model’s output (EThsim) with calibrated canopy resistance model parameters closely matched measured EThEC, with a regression slope, intercept, coefficient of determination (R2), root mean squared error (RMSE) and index of agreement (IOA) of 1.001, 0.010mmh−1, 0.942, 0.057mmh−1 and 0.985, respectively for validation data set in 2015, better than the results calculated by model with parameters calibrated for general paddy field. The improved PM model performed well not only in a dense canopy condition (LAI>3) but also for a sparse canopy (LAI<3). The model also performed well both in sunny and cloudy days of each rice growth stages. A more detailed analysis indicated that EThsim tended to overestimate or underestimate EThEC in varied degrees at noon time or during the transition period from day to night. These differences between EThsim and EThEC associated with the variation of net radiation (Rn), soil heat flux (G0), and soil moisture (θ). Additionally, the PM model calibrated on hourly dataset, performed well in calculating the daily ET directly under WSI for 2014 (R2=0.973, RMSE=0.237mmd−1, IOA=0.993) and 2015 (R2=0.961, RMSE=0.302mmd−1, IOA=0.990). Therefore, the PM model calibrated using the hourly data was capable of accurately estimating both hourly and daily ET for rice under WSI condition.

Suggested Citation

  • Xu, Junzeng & Liu, Xiaoyin & Yang, Shihong & Qi, Zhiming & Wang, Yijiang, 2017. "Modeling rice evapotranspiration under water-saving irrigation by calibrating canopy resistance model parameters in the Penman-Monteith equation," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 55-66.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:182:y:2017:i:c:p:55-66
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2016.12.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377416304991
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.12.010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhao, Peng & Li, Sien & Li, Fusheng & Du, Taisheng & Tong, Ling & Kang, Shaozhong, 2015. "Comparison of dual crop coefficient method and Shuttleworth–Wallace model in evapotranspiration partitioning in a vineyard of northwest China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 41-56.
    2. Poblete-Echeverría, Carlos & Sepúlveda-Reyes, Daniel & Ortega-Farías, Samuel, 2014. "Effect of height and time lag on the estimation of sensible heat flux over a drip-irrigated vineyard using the surface renewal (SR) method across distinct phenological stages," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 74-83.
    3. Pauwels, Valentijn R.N. & Samson, Roeland, 2006. "Comparison of different methods to measure and model actual evapotranspiration rates for a wet sloping grassland," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 82(1-2), pages 1-24, April.
    4. Lecina, S. & Martinez-Cob, A. & Perez, P. J. & Villalobos, F. J. & Baselga, J. J., 2003. "Fixed versus variable bulk canopy resistance for reference evapotranspiration estimation using the Penman-Monteith equation under semiarid conditions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 181-198, May.
    5. Allen, Richard G. & Pruitt, William O. & Wright, James L. & Howell, Terry A. & Ventura, Francesca & Snyder, Richard & Itenfisu, Daniel & Steduto, Pasquale & Berengena, Joaquin & Yrisarry, Javier Basel, 2006. "A recommendation on standardized surface resistance for hourly calculation of reference ETo by the FAO56 Penman-Monteith method," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(1-2), pages 1-22, March.
    6. Xu, Junzeng & Peng, Shizhang & Yang, Shihong & Wang, Weiguang, 2012. "Ammonia volatilization losses from a rice paddy with different irrigation and nitrogen managements," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 184-192.
    7. Zhao, Nana & Liu, Yu & Cai, Jiabing & Paredes, Paula & Rosa, Ricardo D. & Pereira, Luis S., 2013. "Dual crop coefficient modelling applied to the winter wheat–summer maize crop sequence in North China Plain: Basal crop coefficients and soil evaporation component," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 93-105.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lv, Yuping & Gu, Linhui & Xu, Junzeng & Liu, Xiaoyin, 2024. "A coupled hourly water-carbon flux model at plot and field scales for water-saving irrigated rice paddy," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 293(C).
    2. Liu, Xiaoyin & Xu, Junzeng & Liu, Boyi & Wang, Weiguang & Li, Yawei, 2019. "A novel model of water-heat coupling for water-saving irrigated rice fields based on water and energy balance: Model formulation and verification," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 223(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Han, Huanhao & Gao, Rong & Cui, Yuanlai & Gu, Shixiang, 2021. "Transport and transformation of water and nitrogen under different irrigation modes and urea application regimes in paddy fields," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    4. Rawat, Kishan Singh & Bala, Anju & Singh, Sudhir Kumar & Pal, Raj Kumar, 2017. "Quantification of wheat crop evapotranspiration and mapping: A case study from Bhiwani District of Haryana, India," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 200-209.
    5. Han, Huanhao & Gao, Rong & Cui, Yuanlai & Gu, Shixiang, 2022. "A semi-empirical semi-process model of ammonia volatilization from paddy fields under different irrigation modes and urea application regimes," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    6. Qiu, Rangjian & Li, Longan & Liu, Chunwei & Wang, Zhenchang & Zhang, Baozhong & Liu, Zhandong, 2022. "Evapotranspiration estimation using a modified crop coefficient model in a rotated rice-winter wheat system," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    7. Han, Huanhao & Cui, Yuanlai & Huang, Ying & Wang, Shupeng & Duan, Qicai & Zhang, Lei, 2019. "Impacts of the channel/barrier effect and three-dimensional climate—A case study of rice water requirement and irrigation quota in Yunnan, China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 317-327.
    8. Cui, Ningbo & He, Ziling & Jiang, Shouzheng & Wang, Mingjun & Yu, Xiuyun & Zhao, Lu & Qiu, Rangjian & Gong, Daozhi & Wang, Yaosheng & Feng, Yu, 2023. "Inter-comparison of the Penman-Monteith type model in modeling the evapotranspiration and its components in an orchard plantation of Southwest China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 289(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luis Santos Pereira, 2017. "Water, Agriculture and Food: Challenges and Issues," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(10), pages 2985-2999, August.
    2. Rana, G. & Katerji, N. & Lazzara, P. & Ferrara, R.M., 2012. "Operational determination of daily actual evapotranspiration of irrigated tomato crops under Mediterranean conditions by one-step and two-step models: Multiannual and local evaluations," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 285-296.
    3. Rosa, R.D. & Ramos, T.B. & Pereira, L.S., 2016. "The dual Kc approach to assess maize and sweet sorghum transpiration and soil evaporation under saline conditions: Application of the SIMDualKc model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 77-94.
    4. Pereira, L.S. & Paredes, P. & Melton, F. & Johnson, L. & Mota, M. & Wang, T., 2021. "Prediction of crop coefficients from fraction of ground cover and height: Practical application to vegetable, field and fruit crops with focus on parameterization," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    5. Haofang Yan & Song Huang & Jianyun Zhang & Chuan Zhang & Guoqing Wang & Lanlan Li & Shuang Zhao & Mi Li & Baoshan Zhao, 2022. "Comparison of Shuttleworth–Wallace and Dual Crop Coefficient Method for Estimating Evapotranspiration of a Tea Field in Southeast China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Widmoser, Peter, 2009. "A discussion on and alternative to the Penman-Monteith equation," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(4), pages 711-721, April.
    7. Zanotelli, Damiano & Montagnani, Leonardo & Andreotti, Carlo & Tagliavini, Massimo, 2019. "Evapotranspiration and crop coefficient patterns of an apple orchard in a sub-humid environment," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    8. Yan, Haofang & Acquah, Samuel Joe & Zhang, Chuan & Wang, Guoqing & Huang, Song & Zhang, Hengnian & Zhao, Baoshan & Wu, Haimei, 2019. "Energy partitioning of greenhouse cucumber based on the application of Penman-Monteith and Bulk Transfer models," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 201-211.
    9. Diarra, A. & Jarlan, L. & Er-Raki, S. & Le Page, M. & Aouade, G. & Tavernier, A. & Boulet, G. & Ezzahar, J. & Merlin, O. & Khabba, S., 2017. "Performance of the two-source energy budget (TSEB) model for the monitoring of evapotranspiration over irrigated annual crops in North Africa," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 71-88.
    10. Miao, Qingfeng & Rosa, Ricardo D. & Shi, Haibin & Paredes, Paula & Zhu, Li & Dai, Jiaxin & Gonçalves, José M. & Pereira, Luis S., 2016. "Modeling water use, transpiration and soil evaporation of spring wheat–maize and spring wheat–sunflower relay intercropping using the dual crop coefficient approach," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 211-229.
    11. Liu, Minguo & Wu, Xiaojuan & Yang, Huimin, 2022. "Evapotranspiration characteristics and soil water balance of alfalfa grasslands under regulated deficit irrigation in the inland arid area of Midwestern China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    12. Mingze Yao & Manman Gao & Jingkuan Wang & Bo Li & Lizhen Mao & Mingyu Zhao & Zhanyang Xu & Hongfei Niu & Tieliang Wang & Lei Sun & Dongshuang Niu, 2023. "Estimating Evapotranspiration of Greenhouse Tomato under Different Irrigation Levels Using a Modified Dual Crop Coefficient Model in Northeast China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-19, September.
    13. Paredes, Paula & Pereira, Luis S. & Rodrigues, Gonçalo C. & Botelho, Nuno & Torres, Maria Odete, 2017. "Using the FAO dual crop coefficient approach to model water use and productivity of processing pea (Pisum sativum L.) as influenced by irrigation strategies," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 5-18.
    14. Peddinti, Srinivasa Rao & Kambhammettu, BVN P, 2019. "Dynamics of crop coefficients for citrus orchards of central India using water balance and eddy covariance flux partition techniques," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 68-77.
    15. Ji, X.B. & Chen, J.M. & Zhao, W.Z. & Kang, E.S. & Jin, B.W. & Xu, S.Q., 2017. "Comparison of hourly and daily Penman-Monteith grass- and alfalfa-reference evapotranspiration equations and crop coefficients for maize under arid climatic conditions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 1-11.
    16. Liu, Xiaoyin & Xu, Junzeng & Liu, Boyi & Wang, Weiguang & Li, Yawei, 2019. "A novel model of water-heat coupling for water-saving irrigated rice fields based on water and energy balance: Model formulation and verification," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 223(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Chen, Han & Huang, Jinhui Jeanne & McBean, Edward, 2020. "Partitioning of daily evapotranspiration using a modified shuttleworth-wallace model, random Forest and support vector regression, for a cabbage farmland," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    18. Yan, Haofang & Yu, Jianjun & Zhang, Chuan & Wang, Guoqing & Huang, Song & Ma, Jiamin, 2021. "Comparison of two canopy resistance models to estimate evapotranspiration for tea and wheat in southeast China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    19. Paredes, P. & Pereira, L.S. & Almorox, J. & Darouich, H., 2020. "Reference grass evapotranspiration with reduced data sets: Parameterization of the FAO Penman-Monteith temperature approach and the Hargeaves-Samani equation using local climatic variables," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    20. Srivastava, R.K. & Panda, R.K. & Chakraborty, A. & Halder, D., 2018. "Comparison of actual evapotranspiration of irrigated maize in a sub-humid region using four different canopy resistance based approaches," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 156-165.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:182:y:2017:i:c:p:55-66. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.