Advertisement

Theoretical and Applied Climatology

, Volume 138, Issue 1–2, pp 911–916 | Cite as

Photosynthetic active radiation (PAR) in the Nordic countries and the relative flux density method

  • Arne A. GrimenesEmail author
  • Vidar Thue-Hansen
Original Paper
  • 15 Downloads

Abstract

The Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU) started global radiation (G) measurements in 1949. PAR measurements started in 1978 as part of a Nordic project. The project terminated in 1981, but the measurements continued at NMBU. We have used the data from the Nordic project’s seven stations and the long time series from NMBU to investigate the limitations of using the relative flux density method for the estimation of PAR from G. The yearly mean value of the relative flux density PAR/G at NMBU is 0.48 with a standard deviation of 0.02. The monthly mean values of PAR/G show a seasonal variation, with its maximum (0.50) in late summer and minimum in the winter months (0.45). The seasonal variation corresponds to 15% difference in relative cloud cover. Data from the original Nordic project gave the opportunity to investigate the usability of the relative flux density method in the Nordic area. The flux ratio for July was generally larger than the ratio for September or October, even though the differences are small and not statistically significant. In trying to explain this, one obvious candidate is the cloud cover. In the lack of cloud data, time records of global radiation were used to select fair weather and overcast days. For all stations, fair days show higher flux ratios and overcast days show lower flux ratios. Neglect of cloud cover may lead to an error in the calculation of PAR from the simple formula PAR = constant G of the order of 10%.

Notes

References

  1. Aguiar LJ, Fischer GR, Ladle RJ, Malhado ACM, Justino FB, Aguiar RG, da Costa JMN (2012) Modelling the photosynthetically active radiation in south West Amazonia under all sky conditions. Theor Appl Climatol 108:631–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akitsu T, Tome A, Hirose Y, Ijima Nasahara KN (2015) On the stability of radiometric ratios to global solar radiation in Tsukuba, Japan. Agric Forest Met 209-210:59–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alados I, Alados-Arboledas L (1999) Direct and diffuse photosynthetically active radiation: measurements and modelling. Agric Forest Met 93:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alados I, Foyo-Moreno I, Alados-Arboledas L (1996) Photosyntetically active radiation: measurements and modelling. Agric Forest Met 78:121–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Foyo-Moreno I, Alados I, Alados-Arboledas L (2017) A new conventional regression model to estimate hourly photosynthetic photon flux density under all sky conditions. Int J Climatol 37(S1):1067–1075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Foyo-Moreno I, Alados I, Alados-Arboledas L (2018) A new empirical model to estimate hourly diffuse photosynthetic photon flux density. Atmos Res 203:189–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ge S, Smith RG, Jacovides PC, Kramer MC, Carruthers RI (2011) Dynamics of photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) and estimates in coastal northern California. Theor Appl Climatol 105:107–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hegg K (1983) Daily values of global radiation, totally and divided in 5 wavelength bands, from 7 stations in the Nordic countries. Report no. 59, Dept. of Physics and Meteorology, Agric. Univ. of Norway. ISBN 82-576-2004-1Google Scholar
  9. Howell TA, Meek DW, Hatfield JL (1983) Relationship of photo synthetically active radiation to shortwave radiation in the San Joaquin Valley. Agric For Meteorol 28:157–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jacovides CP, Timvios FS, Papaioannou G, Asimakopoulos DN, Theofilou CM (2004) Ratio of PAR to broadband solar radiation measurements in Cyprus. Agric For Meteorol 121:135–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Li R, Zhao L, Ding Y, Wang S, Ji G, Xiao Y, Liu G, Sun L (2010) Monthly ratios of PAR to global solar radiation measured at northern Tibetan plateau, China. Sol Energy 84:964–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. McCree KJ (1972) Test of current definitions of photosynthetically active radiation against leaf photosynthesis data. Agric Meteorol 10:443–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Meek DW, Hatfield JL, Howell TA, Idso SB, Reginato RJ (1984) A generalized relationship between photosynthetically active radiation and solar radiation. Agron J 76:939–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Monteith JL (1973) Principle of environmental physics, First edn. Edward Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Papaioannou G, Papanikolaou N, Retalis D (1993) Relationships of photosynthetically active radiation and shortwave irradiance. Theor Appl Climatol 48:23–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rao CR (1984) Photosynthetically active components of global solar radiation. Measurements and model computations. Arch Meteorol Geophys Bioclim, Set B 33:89–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Stanhill G, Fuchs M (1977) The relative flux density of photosynthetically active radiation. J Appl Ecol 14:317–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thue-Hansen V, Grimenes AA (2014) Meteorological data for Ås. Norwegian University of Life Sciences. ISBN 9788276360288Google Scholar
  19. Tsubo M, Walker S (2005) Relationships between photo synthetically active radiation and clearness index at Bloemfontain, South Africa. Theor Appl Climatol 80:17–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Udo SO, Aro TO (1999) Global PAR related to global solar radiation for Central Nigeria. Agric For Meteor 97:21–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Williams JG (1976) Small variations in the photo synthetically active radiation of solar radiation on clear days. J Arch Meteor Geophys Bioklim 33:89–98Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Norwegian University of Life SciencesÅsNorway

Personalised recommendations