IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v184y2017icp145-155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of 16 models for reference crop evapotranspiration against weighing lysimeter measurement

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Xiaoying
  • Xu, Chunying
  • Zhong, Xiuli
  • Li, Yuzhong
  • Yuan, Xiaohuan
  • Cao, Jingfeng

Abstract

Accurate estimation of reference crop evapotranspiration (ET0) is important due to its crucial role in determining crop water requirement in irrigated agriculture. Though a great number of models have been developed, their rigorous evaluation with measurements is still lacking, leading to confusion and arbitrariness in model selection. In this paper daily estimates of 16 ET0 models, including five combination-, six radiation and five temperature-based ones, were compared with weighing lysimeter measurements during crop growing season (April through October) in 2012 at a semiarid site in China. Daily ET0 was measured by two weighing lysimeters (area 1.3m×1.3m, depth 2.3m) located in a fescue grass (Festuca arundinacea Schreb) plot (100m×100m) surrounded by a 167ha crop, winter wheat rotated with summer maize. We found the models were ranked decreasingly as: FAO-ppp-17 Penman>1963 Penman>FAO-24 Blaney-Criddle (BC)>1996 Kimberly Penman>FAO-24 radiation>FAO-56 Penman-Monteith (PM)>FAO-24 Penman>Turc>DeBruin-Keijman>Jensen-Haise>Priestley-Taylor>Hargreaves>Makkink>Hamon>Blaney- Criddle>Mcloud on basis of RMSE (root mean square error). Overall, the combination models performed best with RMSE ranging from 0.93 to 1.32mmd−1, followed by the radiation models with RMSE from 1.28 to 1.79mmd−1, and the temperature models with RMSE from 1.09 to 2.48mmd−1. The best combination model (FAO-ppp-17 Penman) was respectively 29% and 17% more accurate than the best radiation (FAO-24 radiation) and temperature (FAO-24 BC) models. Better performance of the combination and radiation models resulted because they explicitly contain the dominant factors influencing ET0. All models tended to overestimate under low evaporative demand while underestimating the measured values under high demand, but on average the combination and radiation methods underestimated by 0.46mmd−1 and 0.60mmd−1, respectively, whereas the temperature method overestimated by 0.21mmd−1. All combination and radiation models, and the Hargreaves and FAO-24 BC in temperature method showed robust structure. To improve them future efforts should be on local calibration, but for temperature models showing structure failure focus should be on its optimization. The coefficients of commonly used models were calibrated and related to meteorological variables. Particularly, those of the Priestley-Taylor, Makkink, Turc and the Hamon were enhanced, while those of the Hargreaves and BC were decreased. In climate similar to the current site in China we suggest continued use of the older Penman equations for combination method and the FAO-24 radiation or Turc for radiation method. Meanwhile, two questions need to be addressed in future studies: i) adoption of the FAO-56 PM equation as the sole standard for computing ET0 and the proper value for surface resistance; and ii) the effectiveness of the later modifications to the original wind function in the Penman equation.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Xiaoying & Xu, Chunying & Zhong, Xiuli & Li, Yuzhong & Yuan, Xiaohuan & Cao, Jingfeng, 2017. "Comparison of 16 models for reference crop evapotranspiration against weighing lysimeter measurement," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 145-155.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:184:y:2017:i:c:p:145-155
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2017.01.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377417300409
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agwat.2017.01.017?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. Perera, Kushan C. & Western, Andrew W. & Nawarathna, Bandara & George, Biju, 2015. "Comparison of hourly and daily reference crop evapotranspiration equations across seasons and climate zones in Australia," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 84-96.
    2. Lopez-Urrea, R. & Martin de Santa Olalla, F. & Fabeiro, C. & Moratalla, A., 2006. "Testing evapotranspiration equations using lysimeter observations in a semiarid climate," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(1-2), pages 15-26, September.
    3. Pereira, Antonio Roberto & Pruitt, William Oregon, 2004. "Adaptation of the Thornthwaite scheme for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 251-257, May.
    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. Martinez-Cob, A. & Tejero-Juste, M., 2004. "A wind-based qualitative calibration of the Hargreaves ET0 estimation equation in semiarid regions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 251-264, February.
    6. 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.
    7. Liu, Xiaoying & Xu, Yinlong & Zhong, Xiuli & Zhang, Wenying & Porter, John Roy & Liu, Wenli, 2012. "Assessing models for parameters of the Ångström–Prescott formula in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 327-338.
    8. Vaughan, P.J. & Trout, T.J. & Ayars, J.E., 2007. "A processing method for weighing lysimeter data and comparison to micrometeorological ETo predictions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(1-3), pages 141-146, March.
    9. Kashyap, P. S. & Panda, R. K., 2001. "Evaluation of evapotranspiration estimation methods and development of crop-coefficients for potato crop in a sub-humid region," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 9-25, August.
    10. Gavilan, P. & Lorite, I.J. & Tornero, S. & Berengena, J., 2006. "Regional calibration of Hargreaves equation for estimating reference ET in a semiarid environment," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 257-281, March.
    11. Liu, Xiaoying & Mei, Xurong & Li, Yuzhong & Wang, Qingsuo & Zhang, Yanqing & Porter, John Roy, 2009. "Variation in reference crop evapotranspiration caused by the Ångström-Prescott coefficient: Locally calibrated versus the FAO recommended," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(7), pages 1137-1145, July.
    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. Dong, Juan & Xing, Liwen & Cui, Ningbo & Guo, Li & Liang, Chuan & Zhao, Lu & Wang, Zhihui & Gong, Daozhi, 2024. "Estimating reference crop evapotranspiration using optimized empirical methods with a novel improved Grey Wolf Algorithm in four climatic regions of China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    2. Mattar, Mohamed A., 2018. "Using gene expression programming in monthly reference evapotranspiration modeling: A case study in Egypt," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 28-38.
    3. Xiang, Keyu & Li, Yi & Horton, Robert & Feng, Hao, 2020. "Similarity and difference of potential evapotranspiration and reference crop evapotranspiration – a review," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    4. Rares Halbac-Cotoara-Zamfir & Asdrubal Jesus Farias-Ramirez & Jarbas Honorio de Miranda & Maria Alejandra Moreno-Pizani & Sergio Nascimento Duarte & Franklin Javier Paredes-Trejo & Luca Salvati & Cris, 2022. "Simulation of Subsurface Drainage in the Sugarcane Crop under Different Spacing and Drain Depths," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-20, April.
    5. Su, Qiong & Singh, Vijay P. & Karthikeyan, Raghupathy, 2022. "Improved reference evapotranspiration methods for regional irrigation water demand estimation," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 274(C).
    6. Malakshahi, Amir- Ashkan & Darzi- Naftchali, Abdullah & Mohseni, Behrooz, 2020. "Analyzing water table depth fluctuation response to evapotranspiration involving DRAINMOD model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    7. Lucas Borges Ferreira & Fernando França da Cunha & Sidney Sara Zanetti, 2021. "Selecting models for the estimation of reference evapotranspiration for irrigation scheduling purposes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-18, January.
    8. Abimbola, Olufemi P. & Franz, Trenton E. & Rudnick, Daran & Heeren, Derek & Yang, Haishun & Wolf, Adam & Katimbo, Abia & Nakabuye, Hope N. & Amori, Anthony, 2022. "Improving crop modeling to better simulate maize yield variability under different irrigation managements," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    9. Peter Addo Amarkai & Sinan Süheri, 2024. "Comparative Evaluation of Crop Evapotranspiration Estimation Methods in a Semi-Arid Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-20, December.
    10. Dong, Juan & Xing, Liwen & Cui, Ningbo & Zhao, Lu & Guo, Li & Wang, Zhihui & Du, Taisheng & Tan, Mingdong & Gong, Daozhi, 2024. "Estimating reference crop evapotranspiration using improved convolutional bidirectional long short-term memory network by multi-head attention mechanism in the four climatic zones of China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    11. Manuel Soler-Méndez & Dolores Parras-Burgos & Estefanía Mas-Espinosa & Antonio Ruíz-Canales & Diego S. Intrigliolo & José Miguel Molina-Martínez, 2021. "Standardization of the Dimensions of a Portable Weighing Lysimeter Designed to Be Applied to Vegetable Crops in Mediterranean Climates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    12. Liu, Meihan & Shi, Haibin & Paredes, Paula & Ramos, Tiago B. & Dai, Liping & Feng, Zhuangzhuang & Pereira, Luis S., 2022. "Estimating and partitioning maize evapotranspiration as affected by salinity using weighing lysimeters and the SIMDualKc model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 261(C).
    13. Singh Rawat, Kishan & Kumar Singh, Sudhir & Bala, Anju & Szabó, Szilárd, 2019. "Estimation of crop evapotranspiration through spatial distributed crop coefficient in a semi-arid environment," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 922-933.
    14. Yan, Shicheng & Wu, Lifeng & Fan, Junliang & Zhang, Fucang & Zou, Yufeng & Wu, You, 2021. "A novel hybrid WOA-XGB model for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration using local and external meteorological data: Applications in arid and humid regions of China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    15. Yang, Yang & Luo, Yufeng & Wu, Conglin & Zheng, Hezhen & Zhang, Lei & Cui, Yuanlai & Sun, Ningning & Wang, Li, 2019. "Evaluation of six equations for daily reference evapotranspiration estimating using public weather forecast message for different climate regions across China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 386-399.
    16. Yang, Yong & Chen, Rensheng & Han, Chuntan & Liu, Zhangwen, 2021. "Evaluation of 18 models for calculating potential evapotranspiration in different climatic zones of China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    17. Youssef Kassem & Hüseyin Gökçekuş & Rifat Gökçekuş, 2024. "Towards Sustainable Energy Solutions: Evaluating the Impact of Floating PV Systems in Reducing Water Evaporation and Enhancing Energy Production in Northern Cyprus," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-38, October.

    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. 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).
    2. Jabloun, M. & Sahli, A., 2008. "Evaluation of FAO-56 methodology for estimating reference evapotranspiration using limited climatic data: Application to Tunisia," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(6), pages 707-715, June.
    3. Xiang, Keyu & Li, Yi & Horton, Robert & Feng, Hao, 2020. "Similarity and difference of potential evapotranspiration and reference crop evapotranspiration – a review," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    4. Cruz-Blanco, M. & Lorite, I.J. & Santos, C., 2014. "An innovative remote sensing based reference evapotranspiration method to support irrigation water management under semi-arid conditions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 135-145.
    5. Martí, Pau & López-Urrea, Ramón & Mancha, Luis A. & González-Altozano, Pablo & Román, Armand, 2024. "Seasonal assessment of the grass reference evapotranspiration estimation from limited inputs using different calibrating time windows and lysimeter benchmarks," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 300(C).
    6. Nouri, Milad & Homaee, Mehdi, 2022. "Reference crop evapotranspiration for data-sparse regions using reanalysis products," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    7. 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.
    8. Espadafor, M. & Lorite, I.J. & Gavilán, P. & Berengena, J., 2011. "An analysis of the tendency of reference evapotranspiration estimates and other climate variables during the last 45 years in Southern Spain," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(6), pages 1045-1061, April.
    9. Escarabajal-Henarejos, D. & Fernández-Pacheco, D.G. & Molina-Martínez, J.M. & Martínez-Molina, L. & Ruiz-Canales, A., 2015. "Selection of device to determine temperature gradients for estimating evapotranspiration using energy balance method," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 136-147.
    10. Althoff, Daniel & Filgueiras, Roberto & Dias, Santos Henrique Brant & Rodrigues, Lineu Neiva, 2019. "Impact of sum-of-hourly and daily timesteps in the computations of reference evapotranspiration across the Brazilian territory," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    11. Widmoser, Peter, 2009. "A discussion on and alternative to the Penman-Monteith equation," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(4), pages 711-721, April.
    12. O.E. Mohawesh, 2011. "Evaluation of evapotranspiration models for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration in arid and semiarid environments," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 57(4), pages 145-152.
    13. 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.
    14. Masia, Sara & Trabucco, Antonio & Spano, Donatella & Snyder, Richard L. & Sušnik, Janez & Marras, Serena, 2021. "A modelling platform for climate change impact on local and regional crop water requirements," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    15. Bellido-Jiménez, Juan Antonio & Estévez, Javier & García-Marín, Amanda Penélope, 2021. "New machine learning approaches to improve reference evapotranspiration estimates using intra-daily temperature-based variables in a semi-arid region of Spain," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    16. Kim, Ho-Jun & Chandrasekara, Sewwandhi & Kwon, Hyun-Han & Lima, Carlos & Kim, Tae-woong, 2023. "A novel multi-scale parameter estimation approach to the Hargreaves-Samani equation for estimation of Penman-Monteith reference evapotranspiration," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    17. Martí, Pau & González-Altozano, Pablo & López-Urrea, Ramón & Mancha, Luis A. & Shiri, Jalal, 2015. "Modeling reference evapotranspiration with calculated targets. Assessment and implications," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 81-90.
    18. Osama Mohawesh, 2010. "Spatio-temporal Calibration of Blaney–Criddle Equation in Arid and Semiarid Environment," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(10), pages 2187-2201, August.
    19. 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.
    20. Choudhury, B.U. & Singh, Anil Kumar, 2016. "Estimation of crop coefficient of irrigated transplanted puddled rice by field scale water balance in the semi-arid Indo-Gangetic Plains, India," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 142-150.

    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:184:y:2017:i:c:p:145-155. 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.