Performance Evaluation of Reference Evapotranspiration Equations across a Range of Indian Climates
Publication: Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering
Volume 132, Issue 3
Abstract
Reference crop evapotranspiration is a key variable in procedures established for estimation of evapotranspiration rates of agricultural crops. In recent years, there is growing evidence to show that the more physically based FAO-56 Penman–Monteith (PM) combination method yields consistently more accurate estimates across a wide range of climates and is being proposed as the sole method for computations. However, other methods continue to remain popular among Indian practitioners either because of traditional usage or because of their simpler input data requirements. In this study, we evaluated the performances of several methods in the major climate regimes of India with a view to quantify differences in estimates as influenced by climatic conditions and also to identify methods that yield results closest to the FAO-56 PM method. Performances of seven methods, representing temperature-based, radiation-based, pan evaporation-based, and combination-type equations, were compared with the FAO-56 PM method using historical climate data from four stations located one each in arid (Jodhpur), semiarid (Hyderabad), subhumid (Bangalore), and humid (Pattambi) climates of India. For each location, estimates by all the methods for assumed hypothetical grass reference crop were statistically compared using daily climate records extending over periods of 3–4 years. Comparisons were performed for daily and monthly computational time steps. Overall results while providing information on variations in FAO-56 PM values across climates also indicated climate-specific differences in estimates obtained by the various methods. Among the methods evaluated, the FAO-56 Hargreaves (temperature-based) method yielded estimates closest to the FAO-56 PM method both for daily and monthly time steps, in all climates except the humid one where the Turc (radiation-based) was best. Considering daily comparisons, the associated minimum standard errors of estimate (SEE) were 1.35, 0.78, 0.67, and 0.31 mm/day, for the arid, semiarid, subhumid, and humid locations, respectively. For monthly comparisons, minimum SEE values were smaller at 0.95, 0.59, 0.38, and 0.20 mm/day for arid, semiarid, subhumid, and humid locations, respectively. These results indicate that the choice of an alternative simpler equation in a particular climate on the basis of SEE is dictated by the time step adopted and also it appears that the simpler equations yield much smaller errors when monthly computations are made. In order to provide simple estimation tools for practitioners, linear regression equations for preferred FAO-56 PM estimates in terms of estimates by the simpler methods were developed and validated for each climate. A novel attempt was made to investigate the reasons for the climate-dependent success of the simpler alternative equations using multivariate factor analysis techniques. For each climate, datasets comprising FAO-56 PM estimates and the climatic variables were subject to factor analysis and the resulting rotated factor loadings were used to interpret the relative importance of climatic variables in explaining the observed variabilities in estimates. Results of factor analysis more or less conformed the results of the statistical comparisons and provided a statistical justification for the ranking of alternative methods based on performance indices. Factor analysis also indicated that windspeed appears to be an important variable in the arid climate, whereas sunshine hours appear to be more dominant in subhumid and humid climates. Temperature related variables appear to be the most crucial inputs required to obtain estimates comparable to those from the FAO-56 PM method across all the climates considered.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D., and Smith, M. (1998). “Crop evapotranspiration: Guidelines for computing crop water requirements.” Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 56, Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
Allen, R. G., Smith, M., Pereira, L. S., and Perrier, A. (1994). “An update for the calculation of reference evapotranspiration.” ICID Bull., 43(2), 35–92.
Allen, R. G. et al. (2000). “Issues, requirements and challenges in selecting and specifying a standardized ET equation.” Proc., National Irrigation Symp., Phoenix.
Amatya, D. M., Skaggs, R. W., and Gregory, J. D. (1995). “Comparison of methods for estimating REF–ET.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 121(6), 427–435.
Clothier, B. E., Kerr, J. P., Talbot, J. S., and Scotter, D. R. (1982). “Measured and estimated evapotranspiration from well–watered crops.” N. Z. J. Agric. Res., 25, 301–307.
Doorenbos, J., and Pruitt, W. O. (1977). “Guidelines for predicting crop water requirements.” Irrigation and Drain Paper No. 24, Food and Agricultural Organization, Rome.
Frevert, D. K., Hill, R. W., and Braaten, B. C. (1983). “Estimation of evapotranspiration coefficients.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 109(2), 265–270.
George, B. A., Reddy, B. R. S., Raghuvanshi, N. S., and Wallender, W. W. (2002). “Decision support system for estimating reference evapotranspiration.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 128(1), 1–10.
Gunston, H., and Batchelor, C. H. (1983). “A comparison of the Priestley–Taylor and Penman methods for estimating reference crop evapotranspiration in tropical countries.” Agric. Water Manage., 6, 65–77.
Haan, C. T. (1995). Statistical methods in hydrology, Affiliated East-West, New Delhi, India.
Hargreaves, G. H., and Samani, Z. (1985). “Reference crop evapotranspiration from temperature.” Appl. Eng. Agric. 1, 96–99.
Irmak, S., Allen, R. G., and Whitty, E. B. (2003). “Daily grass and alfalfa-reference evapotranspiration estimates and alfalfa-to-grass evapotranspiration ratios in Florida.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 129(5), 360–370.
Itenfisu, D., Elliot, R. L., Allen, R. G., and Walter, I. A. (2003). “Comparison of reference evapotranspiration calculations as part of the ASCE standardization effort.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 129(6), 440–448.
Jensen, M. E., Burman, R. D., and Allen, R. G. (1990). “Evapotranspiration and Irrigation water Requirements.” ASCE manuals and reports on engineering practice, No. 70, ASCE, New York.
Kashyap, P. S., and Panda, R. K. (2001). “Evaluation of evapotranspiration estimation methods and development of crop-coefficients for potato crop in sub-humid region.” Agric. Water Manage., 50, 9–25.
Katul, G. G., Cuenca, R. H., Grebet, P., Wright, J. L., and Pruitt, W. O. (1992). “Analysis of evaporative flux data for various climates.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 118(4), 601–618.
Kotsopoulos, S., and Babajimopoulos, C. (1997). “Analytical estimation of modified Penman equation parameters.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 123(4), 253–256.
Kreider, J. F. (1979). Medium and high temperature solar process, Academic, New York.
Lowe, P. R. (1977). “An approximating polynomial for the computation of saturation vapor pressure.” J. Appl. Meteorol., 16, 100–103.
Mall, R. K., and Gupta, B. R. D. (2002). “Comparison of evapotranspiration models.” Mausam, 53(2), 119–126.
McCuen, R. H., and Snyder, W. M. (1986). Hydrologic modeling: Statistical methods and applications, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
Michalapoulou, H., and Papaioannou, G. (1991). “Reference crop evapotranspiration over Greece.” Agric. Water Manage., 20, 209–221.
Mohan, S. (1991). “Intercomparison of evapotranspiration estimates.” Hydrol. Sci. J., 36(5), 447–460.
Mohan, S., and Arumugam, N. (1996). “Relative importance of meteorological variables in evapotranspiration: Factor analysis approach.” Water Resour. Manage., 10, 1–20.
Nandagiri, L., and Kovoor, G. M. (2004). “Sensitivity of FAO Penman–Monteith evapotranspiration estimates to alternative procedures for estimation of parameters.” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 131(3), 238–248.
Shuttleworth, W. J. (1992). “Evaporation.” Handbook of hydrology, D. R. Maidment, ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
Subba Rao, K. (1983). “Day to night windspeed ratios over India.” Mausam, 34(2), 230–234.
Subrahmanyam, V. P. (1983) “Some aspects of water balance in the tropical monsoon climates of India.” Proc., Int. Association of Hydrological Sciences Symp., Hamburg, Germany, Publication No. 140, International Association of Hydrological Sciences, 325–331.
Subramaniam, A. R., and Rao, A. S. (1985). “Prediction of ET of some crops under semi-arid and dry sub-humid climates of Maharashtra.” Mausam, 36(1), 67–70.
Tyagi, N. K., Sharma, D. K., and Luthra, S. K. (2003). “Determination of evapotranspiration for maize and berseem clover.” Irrig. Sci., 21, 173–181.
Ventura, F., Spano, D., Duce, P., and Snyder, R. L. (1999). “An evaluation of common evapotranspiration equations.” Irrig. Sci., 18, 163–170.
Xu, C. Y., and Singh, V. P. (2002). “Cross comparison of empirical equations for calculating potential evapotranspiration with data from Switzerland.” Water Resour. Manage., 16, 197–219.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2006 ASCE.
History
Received: Jan 31, 2005
Accepted: Aug 16, 2005
Published online: Jun 1, 2006
Published in print: Jun 2006
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.