An intercomparison of radiation partitioning models in vineyard canopies
- 9 Downloads
Multiple radiation transfer models with unique clumping indices (a total of five approaches) were evaluated on two Pinot Noir vineyards in Central California over 3 years. In the first approach, a basic clumping index meant for heterogeneous randomly placed clumped canopies was combined with the Campbell and Norman transfer model (C&N–H). The other four approaches, namely, the Campbell and Norman with rectangular hedgerow clumping index (C&N–R), Campbell and Norman with a geometric elliptical hedgerow model (C&N–E), the 4-stream scattering by arbitrary inclined leaves model (4SAIL) with row-crop clumping index, and the discrete anisotropic radiative transfer (DART) models, account for the unique canopy coverage distribution of the vineyard row-structured canopies. Each modeling approach varied in its complexity to predict transmitted solar radiation at ground level and the outputs were compared to solar radiation observed at the surface with an array of pyranometers. All five modeling approaches showed good agreement with the observed values [correlation coefficients (r) ranged from 0.95 to 0.97]. Model performance varied throughout the season due to their sensitivity to canopy growth. Although r values showed good agreement among all approaches, the C&N–E and DART models showed a better “goodness of fit” with lower root mean squared and bias values.
Funding was provided by USDA-ARS CRIS projects.
- Allen RG (2005) Environmental and water resources Institute (U.S) In: The ASCE standardized reference evapotranspiration equation, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VaGoogle Scholar
- Gastellu-Etchegorry JP, Yin T, Lauret N, Cajgfinger T, Gregoire T, Grau E, Feret JB, Lopes M, Guilleux J, Dedieu G, Malenovský Z, Cook BD, Morton D, Rubio J, Durrieu S, Cazanave G, Martin E, Ristorcelli T (2015) Discrete anisotropic radiative transfer (DART 5) for modeling airborne and satellite spectroradiometer and LIDAR acquisitions of natural and urban landscapes. Remote Sens 7:1667–1701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Howell TA, Steiner JL, Evett SR, Schneider AD, Copeland KS, Dusek DA, Tunick A (1993) Radiation balance and soil water evaporation of bare Pullman clay loam soil. In: Allen RG, Neale CMU (eds) Management of irrigation and drainage systems: integrated perspectives. American Society of Civil Engineering, New York, pp 922–929 InGoogle Scholar
- Kuusk A (1985) The hot spot effect of a uniform vegetative cover. Sov J Remote Sens 3(4):645–658Google Scholar
- Semmens KA, Anderson MC, Kustas WP, Gao F, Alfieri JG, McKee L, Prueger JH, Hain CR, Cammalleri C, Yang Y, Xia T, Sanchez L, Alsina MM, Vélez M (2016) Monitoring daily evapotranspiration over two California vineyards using Landsat 8 in a multi-sensor data fusion approach. Remote Sens Environ 185:155–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Widlowski JL, Pinty B, Lopatka M, Atzberger C, Buzica D, Chelle M, Disney M, Gastellu-Etchegorry JP, Gerboles M, Gobron N (2013) The fourth radiation transfer model intercomparison (RAMI-IV): proficiency testing of canopy reflectance models with ISO-13528. J Geophys Res Atmos 118:6869–6890CrossRefGoogle Scholar