Advertisement

Theoretical and Applied Climatology

, Volume 136, Issue 1–2, pp 441–455 | Cite as

Calibration and evaluation of the FAO56-Penman-Monteith, FAO24-radiation, and Priestly-Taylor reference evapotranspiration models using the spatially measured solar radiation across a large arid and semi-arid area in southern Iran

  • Shohreh Didari
  • Seyed Hamid AhmadiEmail author
Original Paper
  • 136 Downloads

Abstract

Crop evapotranspiration (ET) is one of the main components in calculating the water balance in agricultural, hydrological, environmental, and climatological studies. Solar radiation (Rs) supplies the available energy for ET, and therefore, precise measurement of Rs is required for accurate ET estimation. However, measured Rs and ET and are not available in many areas and they should be estimated indirectly by the empirical methods. The Angström-Prescott (AP) is the most popular method for estimating Rs in areas where there are no measured data. In addition, the locally calibrated coefficients of AP are not yet available in many locations, and instead, the default coefficients are used. In this study, we investigated different approaches for Rs and ET calculations. The daily measured Rs values in 14 stations across arid and semi-arid areas of Fars province in south of Iran were used for calibrating the coefficients of the AP model. Results revealed that the calibrated AP coefficients were very different and higher than the default values. In addition, the reference ET (ETo) was estimated by the FAO56 Penman–Monteith (FAO56 PM) and FAO24-radiation methods by using the measured Rs and were then compared with the measured pan evaporation as an indication of the potential atmospheric demand. Interestingly and unlike many previous studies, which have suggested the FAO56 PM as the standard method in calculation of ETo, the FAO24-radiation with the measured Rs showed better agreement with the mean pan evaporation. Therefore, the FAO24-radiation with the measured Rs was used as the reference method for the study area, which was also confirmed by the previous studies based on the lysimeter data. Moreover, the accuracy of calibrated Rs in the estimation of ETo by the FAO56 PM and FAO24-radiation was investigated. Results showed that the calibrated Rs improved the accuracy of the estimated ETo by the FAO24-radiation compared with the FAO24-radiation using the measured Rs as the reference method, whereas there was no improvement in the estimation of ETo by the FAO56 PM method compared with the FAO24-radiation using the measured Rs. Moreover, the empirical coefficient (α) of the Priestley and Taylor (PT) ETo estimation method was calibrated against the reference method and results indicated ca. 2 or higher α values than the recommended α = 1.26 in all stations. An empirical equation was suggested based on yearly mean relative humidity for estimation of α in the study area. Overall, this study showed that (1) the FAO24-radiation method with the either measured or calibrated Rs is more accurate than the FAO56 PM, (2) the spatially calibrated AP coefficients are very different from each other over an arid and semi-arid area and are higher than those proposed by the FAO56, (3) the original PT model is not applicable in arid and semi-arid area and substantially underestimates the ETo, and (4) the coefficient of the PT should be locally calibrated for each station over an arid and semi-arid area.

Keywords

Reference evapotranspiration Measured solar radiation Angstrom–Prescott coefficients FAO56 Penman-Monteith method FAO24-radiation method Priestley and Taylor method 

References

  1. Adamala S, Raghuwanshi N, Mishra A (2015) Generalized quadratic synaptic neural networks for ETo modeling. Environ Process 2:309–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmadi SH, Fooladmand HR (2008) Spatially distributed monthly reference evapotranspiration derived from the calibration of Thornthwaite equation: a case study, south of Iran. Irrig Sci 26:303–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Ghobari HM (2000) Estimation of reference evapotranspiration for southern region of Saudi Arabia. Irrig Sci 19:81–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M (1998) Crop evapotranspiration—guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO irrigation and drainage paper 56 FAO. Rome 300:D05109Google Scholar
  5. Allen RG, Clemmens AJ, Burt CM, Solomon K, O’Halloran T (2005) Prediction accuracy for projectwide evapotranspiration using crop coefficients and reference evapotranspiration. J Irrig Drain Eng 131:24––36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Almorox J, Benito M, Hontoria C (2008) Estimation of global solar radiation in Venezuela. Interciencia 33:280–283Google Scholar
  7. Angstrom A (1924) Solar and terrestrial radiation. Report to the international commission for solar research on actinometric investigations of solar and atmospheric radiation. Q J R Meteorol Soc 50:121–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Badescu V, Gueymard CA, Cheval S, Oprea C, Baciu M, Dumitrescu A, Iacobescu F, Milos I, Rada C (2013) Accuracy analysis for fifty-four clear-sky solar radiation models using routine hourly global irradiance measurements in Romania. Renew Energy 55:85–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bakhtiari B, Ghahraman N, Liaghat A, Hoogenboom G (2010) Evaluation of reference evapotranspiration models for a semiarid environment using lysimeter measurements. J Agric Sci Technol 13:223–237Google Scholar
  10. Bidlake WR (2002) Evapotranspiration and canopy resistance at an undeveloped prairie in a humid subtropical climate. J Am Water Resour Assoc 38:197–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cai J, Liu Y, Lei T, Pereira LS (2007) Estimating reference evapotranspiration with the FAO Penman–Monteith equation using daily weather forecast messages. Agric For Meteorol 145:22–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Castellvi F, Stockle C, Perez P, Ibanez M (2001) Comparison of methods for applying the Priestley–Taylor equation at a regional scale. Hydrol Process 15:1609–1620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chuanyan Z, Zhongren N, Zhaodong F (2004) GIS-assisted spatially distributed modeling of the potential evapotranspiration in semi-arid climate of the Chinese Loess Plateau. J Arid Environ 58:387–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cristea NC, Kampf SK, Burges SJ (2012) Revised coefficients for Priestley-Taylor and Makkink-Hansen equations for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration. J Hydrol Eng 18:1289–1300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dehbozorgi F, Sepaskhah AR (2012) Comparison of artificial neural networks and prediction models for reference evapotranspiration estimation in a semi-arid region. Arch Agron Soil Sci 58:477–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. DehghaniSanij H, Yamamoto T, Rasiah V (2004) Assessment of evapotranspiration estimation models for use in semi-arid environments. Agric Water Manag 64:91–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Didari S, Zand-Parsa S (2017) Estimation of daily global solar irradiation under different sky conditions in central and southern Iran. Theor Appl Climatol 127:587–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Didari S, Norouzi H, Zand-Parsa S, Khanbilvardi R (2017) Estimation of daily minimum land surface air temperature using MODIS data in southern Iran. Theor Appl Climatol 130:1149–1161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dinpashoh Y (2006) Study of reference crop evapotranspiration in I.R. Of Iran. Agric Water Manag 84:123–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Doorenbos J (1977) Guidelines for predicting crop water requirements. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  21. Er-Raki S, Chehbouni A, Khabba S, Simonneaux V, Jarlan L, Ouldbba A, Rodriguez JC, Allen R (2010) Assessment of reference evapotranspiration methods in semi-arid regions: can weather forecast data be used as alternate of ground meteorological parameters? J Arid Environ 74:1587–1596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Flint AL, Childs SW (1991) Use of the Priestley-Taylor evaporation equation for soil water limited conditions in a small forest clearcut. Agric For Meteorol 56:247–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Garcia M, Raes D, Allen R, Herbas C (2004) Dynamics of reference evapotranspiration in the Bolivian highlands (Altiplano). Agric For Meteorol 125:67–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gavilan P, Lorite IJ, Tornero S, Berengena J (2006) Reginonal calibration of Hargreaves equation for estimationf reference ET in a semiarid environment. Agric Water Manag 81:257–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hargreaves GH, Samani ZA (1985) Reference crop evapotranspiration from temperature. Appl Eng Agric 1:96–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hobbins MT, Ramirez JA, Brown TC (2001) The complementary relationship in estimation of regional evapotranspiration: an enhanced advection-aridity model. Water Resour Res 37:1389–1403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Irmak S, Allen RG, Whitty EB (2003) Daily grass and alfalfareference evapotranspiration estimates and alfalfa to grass evapotranspiration ratios in Florida. J Irrig Drain Eng 129:360–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jafarpur K, Yaghoubi M (1989) Solar radiation for Shiraz, Iran. Solar Wind Technol 6:177–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jensen ME, Burman RD, Allen RG. (1990) Evapotranspiration and irrigation water requirements. ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice, No. 70, American Society of Civil EngineersGoogle Scholar
  30. Kamel M, Shalaby S, Mostafa S (1993) Solar radiation over Egypt: comparison of predicted and measured meteorological data. Sol Energy 50:463–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kasten F, Golchert HJ, Stolley M (1983) Parameterization of radiation fluxes as function of solar elevation, cloudiness and turbidity. In: Palz W (ed) Solar Radiation Data. Solar Energy R&D in the European Community Series F, vol 2. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  32. Katerji N, Rana G (2014) FAO-56 methodology for determining water requirement of irrigated crops: critical examination of the concepts, alternative proposals and validation in Mediterranean region. Theor Appl Climatol 116:515–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kisi O, Cengiz TM (2013) Fuzzy genetic approach for estimating reference evapotranspiration of Turkey: Mediterranean region. Water Resour Manag 27:3541–3553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kloss S, Pushpalatha R, Kamoyo KJ, Schütze N (2012) Evaluation of crop models for simulating and optimizing deficit irrigation systems in arid and semi-arid countries under climate variability. Water Resour Manag 26:997–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Liu D, Scott B (2001) Estimation of solar radiation in Australia from rainfall and temperature observations. Agric For Meteorol 106:41–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Liu X, Mei X, Li Y, Wang Q, Zhang Y, Porter JR (2009) Variation in reference crop evapotranspiration caused by the Ångström–Prescott coefficient: locally calibrated versus the FAO recommended. Agric Water Manag 96:1137–1145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Makkink G (1957) Testing the Penman formula by means of lysimeters. J Inst Water Eng 11:277–288Google Scholar
  38. Malek E (1979) Determination of the constants for the global radiation equation at badjgah, Iran. Agric Meteorol 20:233–235Google Scholar
  39. McAneney K, Itier B (1996) Operational limits to the Priestley-Taylor formula. Irrig Sci 17:37–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mehdizadeh S, Saadatnejad Gharahassanlou H, Behmanesh J (2017) Calibration of Hargreaves-Samani and Priestley-Taylor equations in estimating reference evapotranspiration in the northwest of Iran. Arch Agron Soil Sci 63:942–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Meza F, Varas E (2000) Estimation of mean monthly solar global radiation as a function of temperature. Agric For Meteorol 100:231–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Moazed H, Ghaemi AA, Rafiee F (2014) Evaluation of several reference evapotranspiration methods: a comparative study of greenhouse and outdoor conditions. Transactions of. Civ Eng 38:421–437Google Scholar
  43. Moradi I (2009) Quality control of global solar radiation using sunshine duration hours. Energy 34:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mousavi R, Sabziparvar AA, Marofi S, Pak NAE, Heydari M (2015) Calibration of the Angström-Prescott solar radiation model for accurate estimation of reference evapotranspiration in the absence of observed solar radiation. Theor Appl Climatol 119:43–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ngongondo C, Xu C-Y, Tallaksen LM, Alemaw B (2013) Evaluation of the FAO Penman–Montheith, Priestley–Taylor and Hargreaves models for estimating reference evapotranspiration in southern Malawi. Hydrol Res 44:706–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Penman HL (1948) Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and grass. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London a: mathematical, physical and engineering sciences, 1948. Vol 1032. The Royal Society, pp 120–145Google Scholar
  47. Pereira AR, Pruitt WO (2004) Adaptation of the Thornthwaite scheme for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration. Agric Water Manag 66:251–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Perugu M, Singam AJ, Kamasani CSR (2013) Multiple linear correlation analysis of daily reference evapotranspiration. Water Resour Manag 27:1489–1500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Prescott J (1940) Evaporation from a water surface in relation to solar radiation. Trans R Soc S Aust 64:114–118Google Scholar
  50. Priestley C, Taylor R (1972) On the assessment of surface heat flux and evaporation using large scale parameters. In: Mon. Weather Rev, 1972. Citeseer,Google Scholar
  51. Razzaghi F, Sepaskhah AR (2010) Assessment of nine different equations for ETo estimation using lysimeter data in a semi-arid environment. Arch Agron Soil Sci 56:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rojas JP, Sheffield RE (2013) Evaluation of daily reference evapotranspiration methods as compared with the ASCE-EWRI Penman-Monteith equation using limited weather data in Northeast Louisiana. J Irrig Drain Eng 139:285–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sabziparvar AA, Shetaee H (2007) Estimation of global solar radiation in arid and semi-arid climates of east and west Iran. Energy 32:649–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sabziparvar A-A, Tabari H (2010) Regional estimation of reference evapotranspiration in arid and semiarid regions. J Irrig Drain Eng 136:724–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sabziparvar AA, Mousavi R, Marofi S, Ebrahimipak NA, Heidari M (2013) An improved estimation of the Angstrom–Prescott radiation coefficients for the FAO56 Penman–Monteith evapotranspiration method. Water Resour Manag 27:2839–2854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Shahrokhnia MH, Sepaskhah AR (2013) Single and dual crop coefficients and crop evapotranspiration for wheat and maize in a semi-arid region. Theor Appl Climatol 114:495–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Shuttleworth WJ, Wallace JS (2009) Calculating the water requirements of irrigated crops in Australia using the Matt-Shuttleworth approach. Trans ASABE 52:1895–1906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Steduto P et al. (1996) Penman-Monteith reference evapotranspiration estimates in the Mediterranean region. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Evapotranspiration and Irrigation Scheduling, San Antonio, TX, USA, 1996. pp 3–6Google Scholar
  59. Sumner DM, Jacobs JM (2005) Utility of Penman–Monteith, Priestley–Taylor, reference evapotranspiration, and pan evaporation methods to estimate pasture evapotranspiration. J Hydrol 308:81–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tabari H, Talaee PH (2011) Local calibration of the Hargreaves and Priestley-Taylor equations for estimating reference evapotranspiration in arid and cold climates of Iran based on the Penman-Monteith model. J Hydrol Eng 16:837–845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tabari H, Hosseinzadehtalaei P, Willems P, Martinez C (2016) Validation and calibration of solar radiation equations for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration at cool semi-arid and arid locations. Hydrol Sci J 61:610–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Temesgen B, Eching S, Davidoff B, Frame K (2005) Comparison of some reference evapotranspiration equations for California. J Irrig Drain Eng 131:73–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Thornthwaite CW (1948) An approach toward a rational classification of climate. Geogr Rev 38:55–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Thornton PE, Running SW (1999) An improved algorithm for estimating incident daily solar radiation from measurements of temperature, humidity, and precipitation. Agric For Meteorol 93:211–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tomar AS (2016) Performance of radiation-based reference evapotranspiration equation developed for Indian sub-humid conditions. J Agrometeorol 18:76–82Google Scholar
  66. Traore S, Guven A (2012) Regional-specific numerical models of evapotranspiration using gene-expression programming interface in Sahel. Water Resour Manag 26:4367–4380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Willmott CJ (1982) Some comments on the evaluation of model performance. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 63:1309–1313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Xu CY, Chen D (2005) Comparison of seven models for estimation of evapotranspiration and groundwater recharge using lysimeter measurement data in Germany. Hydrol Process 19:3717–3734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Xu C-Y, Singh V (2005) Evaluation of three complementary relationship evapotranspiration models by water balance approach to estimate actual regional evapotranspiration in different climatic regions. J Hydrol 308:105–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yin Y, Wu S, Zheng D, Yang Q (2008) Radiation calibration of FAO56 Penman–Monteith model to estimate reference crop evapotranspiration in China. Agric Water Manag 95:77–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yoder R, Odhiambo L, Wright W (2005) Evaluation of methods for estimating daily reference crop evapotranspiration at a site in the humid Southeast United States. Appl Eng Agric 21:197–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Irrigation Department, Faculty of AgricultureShiraz UniversityShirazIran
  2. 2.Drought Research CenterShiraz UniversityShirazIran

Personalised recommendations