Evaluation of wheat and maize evapotranspiration determination by direct use of the Penman–Monteith equation in a semi-arid region

Shahrokhnia, Mohammad Hossein; Sepaskhah, Ali Reza

doi:10.1080/03650340.2011.584216

Cited by 16 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Attarod et al (2009) reported that average ET rates for the four vegetation seasons in the wheat, the soybean and the cornfield in the experimental farm of Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology (Japan) were 2.4 mm day À1 , 3.6 mm day À1 and 3.5 mm day À1 , respectively. Daily ET rates varied from 4.3 mm day À1 at the winter wheat to 6.8 mm day À1 at the cornfield in the Fars province (Iran) (Shahrokhnia and Sepaskhah 2012). Djaman and Irmak (2013) reported maize ET rates as 2.7 -3.5 mm day À1 at the South Central Agricultural Laboratory, Nebraska, USA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Distribution of Solar Energy in Agriculture Landscape: Comparison Between Wet Meadow and Crops

Huryna

Hesslerová²,

Pokorný³

et al. 2014

The Role of Natural and Constructed Wetlands in Nutrient Cycling and Retention on the Landscape

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the impact of plant cover on water and energy exchange between land and atmosphere in the Třeboň Biosphere Reserve, Czech Republic. Energy fluxes, evapotranspiration and evaporative fraction were determined over typical crops of agriculture landscape and compared with fluxes in an adjacent wet meadow. The results show distinct differences in heat and water exchange between these ecosystems. Diurnal average difference in evapotranspiration rates for days with high irradiance over the wet meadow and arable crops ranged from 1.1 mm day À1 to 3.4 mm day À1 . Furthermore, the evapotranspiration differences between C3 (rapeseed) and C4 (cornfield) was about 2.3 mm day À1 . Analysis of thermovision pictures showed that temperature variation reached about 9 C between the ploughed field and meadows at the time of maximum intensity of solar radiation. Heat exchange (sensible heat flux) was greater over arable lands, while water exchange (latent heat flux) was stronger over the wet meadow. The evaporative fraction displayed that more than 100 % of available energy was released by the wet meadow through evapotranspiration due to the advection of dry air from the surroundings. Wetlands show equal or even inverse temperature in vertical profile, whereas corn and wheat show noticeable higher temperature at soil surface in comparison with plant stand surface. Therefore, we suggest that introduction of wetlands to agricultural land is one of the most important instruments for the management of water and heat balance of the landscape.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Distribution of Solar Energy in Agriculture Landscape: Comparison Between Wet Meadow and Crops

Huryna

Hesslerová²,

Pokorný³

et al. 2014

The Role of Natural and Constructed Wetlands in Nutrient Cycling and Retention on the Landscape

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(3) and (4)]. Because E is sensitive to small variations in G Sm regardless of the C D formulation that is used (Shahrokhnia and Sepaskhah 2012), measurement of atmospheric humidity profiles improved PM estimates of E 0 by more closely matching the true site-specific aerodynamic resistance (cf. Figs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aerodynamic Resistance and Penman–Monteith Evapotranspiration over a Seasonally Two-Layered Canopy in Semiarid Central Australia

Cleverly

Chen

Boulain

et al. 2013

Journal of Hydrometeorology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate prediction of evapotranspiration E depends upon representative characterization of meteorological conditions in the boundary layer. Drag and bulk transfer coefficient schemes for estimating aerodynamic resistance to vapor transfer were compared over a semiarid natural woodland ecosystem in central Australia. Aerodynamic resistance was overestimated from the drag coefficient, resulting in limited E at intermediate values of vapor pressure deficit. Large vertical humidity gradients were present during the summer, causing divergence between momentum and vapor transport within and above the canopy surface. Because of intermittency in growth of the summer-active, rain-dependent understory and physiological responses of the canopy, leaf resistance varied from less than 50 s m 21 to greater than 10 6 s m 21 , in which the particularly large values were obtained from inversion of drag coefficient resistance. Soil moisture limitations further contributed to divergence between actual and reference E. Unsurprisingly, inclusion of site-specific meteorological (e.g., vertical humidity gradients) and hydrological (e.g., soil moisture content) information improved the accuracy of predicting E when applying Penman-Monteith analysis. These results apply regardless of canopy layering (i.e., even when the understory was not present) wherever atmospheric humidity gradients develop and are thus not restricted to two-layer canopies in semiarid regions.

show abstract

“…are based primarily on the available energy (Rn-G) of the system, with soil moisture being implicitly accounted for by adjusting the air humidity. The Penman (1948) and Penman-Monteith (Monteith 1965) combination equations that form the theoretical basis for the PT-JPL and PM-Mu models, were developed for and tested (Rana and Katerji 1998;Shahrokhnia and Sepaskhah 2011;Sumner and Jacobs 2005) in situations where energy limitations were not present. In contrast, the SEBS model follows 5 a more physically-based approach dependent on the turbulent mixing theory (Brutsaert 2013), which is valid in energy-limited situations similar to those observed during Period 4.…”

Section: Analysis Of Relationship Based On Defined Periodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the relationship between intermediate scale soil moisture and terrestrial evaporation within a semi-arid grassland

Jana¹,

Ershadi²,

McCabe³

2016

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interactions between soil moisture and terrestrial evaporation affect water cycle behaviour and responses between the land surface and the atmosphere across scales. With strong heterogeneities at the land surface, the inherent spatial variability in soil moisture makes its representation via point-scale measurements challenging, resulting in scale-mismatch when compared to coarser-resolution satellite-based soil moisture or evaporation estimates. The Cosmic Ray Soil Moisture 10 Observing System (COSMOS) was developed to address such issues in the measurement and representation of soil moisture at intermediate scales. Here we present an examination of the links observed between COSMOS soil moisture retrievals and evaporation estimates over a pasture in the semi-arid central-west region of New South Wales, Australia. The COSMOS soil moisture product was compared to evaporation derived from three distinct approaches, including the Priestley-Taylor (PT-JPL), Penman-Monteith (PM-Mu) and Surface Energy Balance System (SEBS) models, driven by forcing data from local 15 meteorological station data and remote sensing retrievals from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) sensor. Pearson's Correlations, Quantile-Quantile (Q-Q) plots, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) were used to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate the temporal distributions of soil moisture and evaporation over the study site. The relationships were examined against nearly two years of observation data, as well as for different seasons and for defined periods of analysis.Results highlight that while direct correlations of raw data were not particularly instructive, the Q-Q plots and ANOVA 20 illustrate that the root-zone soil moisture represented by the COSMOS measurements and the modelled evaporation estimates reflect similar distributions under most meteorological conditions. The PT-JPL and PM-Mu model estimates performed contrary to expectation when high soil moisture and cold temperatures were present, while SEBS model estimates displayed a disconnect from the soil moisture distribution in summers with long dry spells. Importantly, no single evaporation model matched the statistical distribution of the measured soil moisture for the entire period, highlighting the challenges in effectively 25 capturing evaporative flux response within changing landscapes.

show abstract

Evaluation of wheat and maize evapotranspiration determination by direct use of the Penman–Monteith equation in a semi-arid region

Cited by 16 publications

References 38 publications

Distribution of Solar Energy in Agriculture Landscape: Comparison Between Wet Meadow and Crops

Distribution of Solar Energy in Agriculture Landscape: Comparison Between Wet Meadow and Crops

Aerodynamic Resistance and Penman–Monteith Evapotranspiration over a Seasonally Two-Layered Canopy in Semiarid Central Australia

Examining the relationship between intermediate scale soil moisture and terrestrial evaporation within a semi-arid grassland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About