Skip to main content

Inter-comparison Between Different Techniques for Evapotranspiration Partitioning: Eddy Covariance-, Sap Flow-, Lysimeter- and FAO-Based Methods

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Smart Technologies Applications and Case Studies (SmartICT 2019)

Abstract

A precise estimate of the evapotranspiration (ET) partitioning is fundamental for determining the crop water needs and optimizing irrigation management. The plant transpiration (T) is generally considered to be the most desirable component, increasing the flow of T within the ET could be one of the most important actions to save water in semi-arid agricultural regions. Given the lack of reference method to estimate the E/T partitioning of wheat crop, this study inter-compares four different methods based on eddy covariance, sap flow and lysimetry measurements and FAO modeling. The objectives are: i) quantify T and ET flows using different approaches and ii) evaluate the response of the FAO dual approach model to different periods of stress. Results indicate that despite the small surface sensed by mini-lysimeters, the partitioning ratio is evaluated more precisely (19% relative error) with lysimetry than with the other systems (any combination of eddy covariance, lysimetry and sap flow measurements). Moreover, stem-scale T measurements from sap flow sensors are subject to representativeness issues at the field scale, and to systematic errors during water-stress and senescence periods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Agam, N., Evett, S.R., Tolk, J.A., Kustas, W.P., Colaizzi, P.D., Alfieri, J.G., McKee, L.G., Copeland, K.S., Howell, T.A., Chávez, J.L.: Evaporative loss from irrigated interrows in a highly advective semi-arid agricultural area. Adv. Water Resour. 50, 20–30 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Leuning, R., Condon, A.G., Dunin, F.X., Zegelin, S., Denmead, O.T.: Rainfall interception and evaporation from soil below a wheat canopy. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 67(3–4), 221–238 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M.: Crop evapotranspiration – Guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO irrigation and drainage paper 56 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kool, D., Agam, N., Lazarovitch, N., Heitman, J.L., Sauer, T.J., Ben-Gal, A.: A review of approaches for evapotranspiration partitioning. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 184, 56–70 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Boast, C.W., Robertson, T.M.: A “micro-lysimeter” method for determining evaporation from bare soil: description and laboratory evaluation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 46(4), 689–696 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Daamen, C.C., Simmonds, L.P., Wallace, J.S., Laryea, K.B., Sivakumar, M.V.K.: Use of microlysimeters to measure evaporation from sandy soils. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 65(3–4), 159–173 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Grimmond, C.S.B., Isard, S.A., Belding, M.J.: Development and evaluation of continuously weighing mini-lysimeters. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 62(3–4), 205–218 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brye, K.R., Norman, J.M., Bundy, L.G., Gower, S.T.: An equilibrium tension lysimeter for measuring drainage through soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 63(3), 536–543 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Williams, D.G., Cable, W., Hultine, K., Hoedjes, J.C.B., Yepez, E.A., Simonneaux, V., Er-Raki, S., Boulet, G., De Bruin, H.A.R., Chehbouni, A., Hartogensis, O.K.: Evapotranspiration components determined by stable isotope, sap flow and eddy covariance techniques. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 125(3), 241–258 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Heilman, J.L., Ham, J.M.: Measurement of mass flow rate of sap in Ligustrum japonicum. HortScience 25(4), 465–467 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Van Dijk, A., Moene, A.F. De Bruin, H.A.R.: The principles of surface flux physics: theory, practice and description of the ECPACK library. Internal Report 2004/1, Meteorology and Air Quality Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 99 pp. (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Twine, T.E., Kustas, W.P., Norman, J.M., Cook, D.R., Houser, P.R., Meyers, T.P., Prueger, J.H., Starks, P.J., Wesely, M.L.: Correcting eddy-covariance flux underestimates over a grassland. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 103, 279–300 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Moore, C.J.: Frequency response corrections for eddy correlation systems. Bound. Layer Meteorol. 37, 17–35 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Scott, R.W.C., Garatuza-Payan, J., Edwards, E., Goodrich, D.C., Williams, D.G., Shuttleworth, W.J.: The understory and overstory partitioning of energy and water fluxes in an open canopy, semi-arid woodland. Agric. For. Meteorol. 114, 127–139 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gerdes, G., Allison, B.E., Pereira, L.S.: Overestimation of soybean crop transpiration by sap flow measurements under field conditions in Central Portugal. Irrig. Sci. 14(3), 135–139 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dynamax, Inc.: Dynagage Sap Flow Sensor: User Manual. Dynamax, Houston (2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zoubair Rafi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Rafi, Z., Merlin, O., Le Dantec, V., Khabba, S., Er-Raki, S., Mordelet, P. (2020). Inter-comparison Between Different Techniques for Evapotranspiration Partitioning: Eddy Covariance-, Sap Flow-, Lysimeter- and FAO-Based Methods. In: El Moussati, A., Kpalma, K., Ghaouth Belkasmi, M., Saber, M., Guégan, S. (eds) Advances in Smart Technologies Applications and Case Studies. SmartICT 2019. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 684. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53187-4_47

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53187-4_47

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-53186-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-53187-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics