Validation and Comparison of Seven Land Surface Evapotranspiration Products in the Haihe River Basin, China

Abstract

Evapotranspiration (ET) is an important part of the surface energy balance and water balance. Due to imperfect model parameterizations and forcing data, there are still great uncertainties concerning ET products. The validation of land surface ET products has a certain research significance. In this study, two direct validation methods, including the latent heat flux (LE) from the flux towers validation method and the water balance validation method, and one indirect validation method, the three-corned hat (TCH) uncertainty analysis, were used to validate and compare seven types of ET products in the Haihe River Basin in China. The products evaluated included six ET products based on remotely-sensed observations (surface energy balance based global land evapotranspiration [EB-ET], Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer [MODIS] global terrestrial evapotranspiration product [MOD16], Penman–Monteith–Leuning Evapotranspiration version 2 [PML_V2], Global Land Surface Satellite [GLASS], global land evaporation Amsterdam model [GLEAM], and Zhangke evapotranspiration [ZK-ET]) and one ET product from atmospheric re-analysis data (Japanese 55-year re-analysis, JRA-55). The goals of this study were to provide a reference for research on ET in the Haihe River Basin. The results indicate the following: (1) The results of the six ET products have a higher accuracy when the flux towers validation method is used. Except for MOD16_ET and EB_ET, the Pearson correlation coefficients (R) were all greater than 0.6. The root mean square deviation (RMSD) values were all less than 40 W/m2. The GLASS_ET data have the smallest average deviation (BIAS) value. Overall, the GLEAM_ET data have a higher accuracy. (2) When the validation of the water balance approach was used, the low values of the MOD16_ET were overestimated and the high values were underestimated. The values of the EB_ET, GLEAM_ET, JRA_ET, PML_ET, and ZK_ET were overestimated. According to the seasonal variations statistics, most of the ET products have higher R values in spring and lower R values in summer, and the RMSD values of most of the products were the highest in summer. (3) According to the results of the uncertainty quantification based on the TCH method, the average value of the relative uncertainties of the GLEAM_ET data were the lowest. The relative uncertainties of the JRA_ET and ZK_ET were higher in mountainous areas than in non-mountainous area, and the relative uncertainties of the PML_ET were lower in mountainous areas. The performances of the EB_ET, GLEAM_ET, and MOD16_ET in mountainous and non-mountainous areas were relatively equal. The relative uncertainties of the ET products were significantly higher in summer than in other periods, and they also varied in the different sub-basins.

Assessment of vapor pressure deficit variability and trends in Spain and possible connections with soil moisture

“…GLEAM has been fully validated at the global scale using data of Eddycovariance towers located on different environment (Martens et al, 2017). Thus, recent comparisons of the output of different model simulations have showed that GLEAM reproduces well the magnitude and temporal variability of the available observations (Guo et al, 2022;Liu et al, 2023;Yang et al, 2022). To match the VPD's temporal resolution, these daily data were aggregated to a weekly time scale.…”