2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.coldregions.2007.04.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The surface energy budget and evapotranspiration in the Tanggula region on the Tibetan Plateau

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
32
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
2
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Several atmosphereland interaction experiments have been conducted on the Tibetan Plateau in recent years (Ma et al, , 2009Tanaka et al, 2001Tanaka et al, , 2003. Those scientific experiments have resulted in much progress regarding the understanding of the surface energy and water budget, regional evaporative fraction, the seasonal variability of soil moisture distributions, atmospheric chemistry, and climatic change (Ma and Tsukamoto, 2002;Hirose et al, 2002;Tanaka et al, 2001Tanaka et al, , 2003Li et al, 2007;Yao et al, 2008Yao et al, , 2011Yu et al, 2008;Cong et al, 2009;Ma et al, 2009Ma et al, , 2012Zheng et al, 2010;Xue et al, 2013;Ma et al, 2014). However, those studies have been limited to the investigation of differences in the surface energy budget between the seasonally frozen ground region and the permafrost region of the Tibetan Plateau.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Several atmosphereland interaction experiments have been conducted on the Tibetan Plateau in recent years (Ma et al, , 2009Tanaka et al, 2001Tanaka et al, , 2003. Those scientific experiments have resulted in much progress regarding the understanding of the surface energy and water budget, regional evaporative fraction, the seasonal variability of soil moisture distributions, atmospheric chemistry, and climatic change (Ma and Tsukamoto, 2002;Hirose et al, 2002;Tanaka et al, 2001Tanaka et al, , 2003Li et al, 2007;Yao et al, 2008Yao et al, , 2011Yu et al, 2008;Cong et al, 2009;Ma et al, 2009Ma et al, , 2012Zheng et al, 2010;Xue et al, 2013;Ma et al, 2014). However, those studies have been limited to the investigation of differences in the surface energy budget between the seasonally frozen ground region and the permafrost region of the Tibetan Plateau.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Previous research has investigated the diurnal, seasonal and annual variation of the SEB at stations over various land cover types in the TP, including grassland (Y. Ma et al, 2003;Tanaka et al, 2003;Liu et al, 2009;Bian et al, 2012), meadow (Gu et al, 2005;Yao et al, 2008Yao et al, , 2011, and glacial and alpine areas (Zou et al, 2009;Yang et al, 2011c;Chen et al, 2012;Zhang et al, 2013). Advanced methods have been developed to retrieve SEB from improved parameterization of routine meteorological observations (Yang et al, 2002(Yang et al, , 2003Chen et al, 2010Chen et al, , 2013bGuo et al, 2011b;Lee et al, 2012) satellite observations (Y.…”
Section: Q Shi and S Liang: Surface Sensible And Latent Heat Fluxesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the wet season, variation was between 1.6 and 4.5 mm day -1 , averaging 3.1 mm day -1 (Figure 5 A Montenegro et al (2008), who reported Kc values of between 0.60 and 1.05. Energy balance closure is an important criterion for evaluating the quality of measured heat flux data from EC systems (Yao et al, 2008). Various studies have shown that this balance typically does not close (Verma et al, 1986;, and the possible reasons can be: sampling error, instrument error, losses of high and low frequencies, ignoring some energy items and advection (Yao et al, 2008).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Energy balance closure is an important criterion for evaluating the quality of measured heat flux data from EC systems (Yao et al, 2008). Various studies have shown that this balance typically does not close (Verma et al, 1986;, and the possible reasons can be: sampling error, instrument error, losses of high and low frequencies, ignoring some energy items and advection (Yao et al, 2008). During the dry season, the energy balance closure varied between 0.79 and 1.05 with a mean of 0.93, which can be considered a good result (Figure 6 A).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%