Evapotranspiration estimation of Platycladus orientalis in Northern China based on various models

Abstract

Platycladus orientalis is one of the most popular afforestation species and greening species for water management in arid and semi-arid regions of northern China. We applied various models to estimate and validate artificial P. orientalis forest evapotranspiration features with the goal of accurately estimating the water use of a P. orientalis plantation. The American Society of Civil Engineers Evapotranspiration–Penman–Monteith model (APM) and FAO56–Penman–Monteith model (FPM) are extensively applied for vegetation evapotranspiration estimation because their reliability has been validated by many scholars. The Priestley–Taylor model (PT) and Hargreaves model (HS) require only the daily maximum temperature, daily minimum temperature and solar radiation to estimate evapotranspiration and are thus widely applied to grasslands but not to forests. We used the Energy Balance Bowen Ratio (EBBR) system to validate the accuracy of the four models. The results indicated that: (1) Compared to the EBBR measurement annual value, APM was the most accurate, followed by FPM, and PT; (2) During the year, the accuracies of the four models varied. APM and FPM underestimated evapotranspiration during June, July and August, whereas PT and HS overestimated evapotranspiration during this period. In the rest of the year, the estimation accuracies were reversed; (3) An analysis of the possible reasons indicated that wind speed, air temperature and precipitation were the most important contributors. High temperatures were measured in June, July and August, which led to an overestimation by PT and HS because these two models only calculated the temperature and radiation without vegetation information. Underestimation also occurred when a low temperature was recorded. Though APM and FPM addressed both meteorological and vegetation factors, slight deviations still existed; and (4) The two models were modified based on EBBR-measured data. Relative humidity was introduced into PT, and parameter “A” in the HS estimation model was amended to 1.41. The accuracy of the modified models significantly increased. The study highlighted the application, comparison and improvement of four models in estimating evapotranspiration and offers more approaches to assess forest hydrological functions.

Keywords

Evapotranspiration estimation / Hargreaves model / Penman–Monteith model / Platycladus orientalis / Priestley–Taylor model

References

[1] Abdi H, Williams LJ. Principal component analysis. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Stat, 2010, 2(4): 433-459.

[2] Allen RG, Pruitt WO, Wright JL, Howell TA, Ventura F, Snyder R, Itenfisu D, Steduto P, Berengena J, Baselga Yrisarry J, Smith M, Pereira LS, Raes D, Perrier A, Alves I, Walter I, Elliott R. A recommendation on standardized surface resistance for hourly calculation of reference ET₀ by the FAO56 Penman–Monteith method. Agric Water Manag, 2006, 81(1): 1-22.

[3] Angus DE, Watts PJ. Evapotranspiration-How good is the Bowen ratio method?. Agric Water Manag, 1984, 8(1): 133-150.

[4] Bailey BJ, Montero JI, Biel C, Wilkinson DJ, Anton A, Jolliet O. Transpiration of Ficus benjamina: comparison of measurements with predictions of the Penman–Monteith model and a simplified version. Agric For Meteorol, 1993, 65(3): 229-243.

[5] De Bruin HAR, Keijman JQ. The Priestley–Taylor evaporation model applied to a large, shallow lake in the Netherlands. J Appl Meteorol, 1979, 18(7): 898-903.

[6] Fan WB, Wu P, Han ZQ, Yao B. Influencing factors analysis of reference crop evapotranspiration and modification of Hargreaves method in Manas river basin. Trans Chin Soc Agric Eng, 2012, 28(8): 19-24.

[7] Hargreaves GH, Allen RG. History and evaluation of Hargreaves evapotranspiration equation. J Irrig Drain Eng, 2003, 129(1): 53-63.

[8] Hu QF, Yang DW, Wang YT, Yang HB. Global calibration of Hargreaves equation and its applicability in China. Adv Water Sci, 2011, 22(2): 160-167.

[9] Irmak S, Howell TA, Allen RG, Payero JO, Martin DL. Standardized ASCE Penman–Monteith: impact of sum-of-hourly vs. 24-hour time step computations at reference weather station sites. Trans Am Soc Agric Eng, 2005, 48(3): 1063-1077.

[10] Irmak S, Payero JO, Martin DL, Irmak A, Howell TA. Sensitivity analyses and sensitivity coefficients of standardized daily ASCE–Penman–Monteith equation. J Irrig Drain Eng, 2006, 132(6): 564-578.

[11] Jensen DT, Hargreaves GH, Temesgen B, Allen RG. Computation of ET0 under nonideal conditions. J Irrig Drain Eng, 1997, 123(5): 394-400.

[12] Kuo SF, Chen FW, Liao PY, Liu CW. A comparative study on the estimation of evapotranspiration using backpropagation neural network: Penman–Monteith method versus pan evaporation method. Paddy Water Environ,, 2011, 9(4): 413-424.

[13] Monteith JL. Evaporation and surface temperature. Q J R Meteorol Soc, 1981, 107(451): 1-27.

[14] Oki T, Kanae S. Global hydrological cycles and world water resources. Science, 2006, 313(5790): 1068-1072.

[15] Ortega-Farias S, Olioso A, Antonioletti R, Brisson N. Evaluation of the Penman–Monteith model for estimating soybean evapotranspiration. Irrig Sci, 2004, 23(1): 1-9.

[16] Perez PJ, Castellvi F, Ibanez M, Rosell JI. Assessment of reliability of Bowen ratio method for partitioning fluxes. Agric For Meteorol, 1999, 97(3): 141-150.

[17] Shuttleworth WJ, Calder IR. Has the Priestley–Taylor equation any relevance to forest evaporation?. J Appl Meteorol, 1979, 18(5): 639-646.

[18] Stannard DI. Comparison of Penman–Monteith, Shuttleworth–Wallace, and modified Priestley–Taylor evapotranspiration models for wild land vegetation in semiarid rangeland. Water Resour Res, 1993, 29(5): 1379-1392.

[19] Valentijn R, Pauwels N, Roeland S. Comparison of different methods to measure and model actual evapotranspiration rates for a wet sloping grassland. Agric Water Manag, 2006, 82(1): 1-24.

[20] Vanderlinden K, Giraldez JV, Van Meirvenne M. Assessing reference evapotranspiration by the Hargreaves method in southern Spain. J Irrig Drain Eng, 2004, 130(3): 184-191.

[21] Venkatesh B, Lakshman N, Purandara BK. Hydrological impacts of afforestation—a review of research in India. J For Res, 2014, 25(1): 37-42.

[22] Wu J, Guan D, Zhang M, Han S, Jin C. Comparison of eddy covariance and BREB methods in determining forest evapotranspiration—case study on broad leaved Korean pine forest in Changbai Mountain. Chin J Ecol, 2005, 24(10): 1245-1249.

[23] Yang YH, Zhang ZY. Method for calculating Lhasa reference crop evapotranspiration by modifying Hargreaves. Adv Water Sci, 2009, 20(5): 614-618.

[24] Yang Y, Chen R, Han C, Qing W. Measurement and estimation of the summertime daily evapotranspiration on alpine meadow in the Qilian Mountains, northwest China. Environ Earth Sci, 2013, 68(8): 2253-2261.

[25] Yin Y, Wu S, Zheng D, Yang Q. Radiation calibration of FAO56 Penman–Monteith model to estimate reference crop evapotranspiration in China. Agric Water Manag, 2008, 95(1): 77-84.

[26] Zhao N, Liu SH, Du H, Yu HY. The effects of urbanization on sunshine duration and the trend of cloud cover amount variation in Beijing area. Clim Environ Res, 2012, 17(2): 233-243.