Evaluation of reference evapotranspiration models for warm arid climate (Case Study: Zahedan station)

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Author

university of zabol

Abstract

Background and objectives: Evapotranspiration (ET) is an important parameter for climatological and hydrological studies, as well as for irrigation planning and management. Evaluation of simple reference evapotranspiration (ETo) methods has received considerable attention in developing countries where the weather data needed to estimate ETo by the Penman–Monteith FAO 56 (PMF-56) model are often incomplete and/or not available. So the goal of this study, was to Evaluation and Comparison 30 different methods according to the standard method of reference evapotranspiration PMF-56 equation and determine the best equation, as a Replace to PMF-56, in a warm arid climate is the city and station of Zahedan.

Materials and methods: In this study, 30 commonly used ETo equations that belonged to four groups: (1) pan evaporation-based methods, (2) temperature-based methods,(3) radiation-based methods, and (4) mass transfer-based methods were evaluated against the PMF-56 standard model; and the best and worst equations of each category were determined from the Zahedan station located in a warm arid climate.The assessed methods were: Cuenca, Allen and Pruitt, Snyder, Modified Snyder, Pereira, Orang, Raghuwanshi and Wallender, FAO-56 (pan evaporation-based), Schendel, four new types of Hargreaves equation reported by Droogers and Allen and Trajkovic, Blaney–Criddle (temperature-based), Makking, Turk, Jensen–Haise, Priestley- Taylor, FAO-24 (radiation-based), Dalton, Trabert, Meyer, Rohwer, Penman, Albrecht, Romanenko, Brockamp and Wenner, WMO and Mahringer (mass transfer-based).

Results: Initially, in each group the monthly mean values ETo (using 30 model) were determined and compared their relative performance with respect to PMF-56 ETo estimates in the study.
The ETo calculated by the Snyder equation (R2=0.85، NRMSE=0.08، PE=8.30), Hargreaves- 4 (R2=0.93، NRMSE=0.04، PE=8.33), Turk 24 (R2=0.96، NRMSE=0.03، PE=6.52) and Dalton (R2=0.81، NRMSE=0.18 PE=12.89), pan evaporation-based, temperature-based, radiation-based and mass transfer-based respectively best matched the ETo estimates by the PMF-56 equation with the lowest errors rates.

Conclusion: In general, the comparative results showed that the mass transfer-based equations had the worst performances, while the radiation-based and temperature-based models (as Turk, Jensen–Haise, Hargreaves- 4 and Blaney–Criddle) were the best-suited equations for estimating ETo in this Warm arid climate (Zahedan). Considering the unavailability of full weather data for applying the PMF-56 model for estimation of ETo in many regions of the world and in different parts of the Iran, especially in developing countries, the results will be useful for choosing the simpler ETo methods in Warm arid climates. It is better to achieve real results for other places with similar climatic conditions to be assessed.

Keywords


1.Allen, R.G. 1996. Assessing integrity of weather data for use in reference. Evapotranspiration
estimation. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. ASCE. 122: 2. 97-106.
2.Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., and Smith, M. 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration -
Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements, FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper
56, FAO, 1998, ISBN 92-5-104219-5.
3.Allen, R.G., Jensen, J.L., Wright, J.L., and Burman, R.D. 1989. Operational estimate of
evapotranspiration. Agron. J. 81: 650-662.
4.Droogers, P., and Allen, R.G. 2002. Estimating reference evapotranspirationunder inaccurate
data conditions. Irrig. Drain. Syst. 16: 33-45.
5.Hargreaves, G.L., and Samani, Z.A. 1985. Reference crop evapotranspiration from
temperature. Appl. Eng. Agric. 1: 2. 96-99.
6.Khoshhal, J., Zare Abyaneh, H., and Joshani, A.R. 2015. Evaluation of different methods to
estimate the reference evapotranspiration by pan evaporation FAO in the catchment area of
the East and South East. Physical Geography Research. 28p. (In Persian)
7.Landeras, G., Ortiz-Barredo, A., and Lopez, J. 2008. Comparison of artificial neural network
models andempirical and semi-empirical equations for dailyreference evapotranspiration
estimation in the Basque Country (Northern Spain). AgriculturalWaterManagement.
95: 5. 553-565.
8.Nasajizavareh, M., and Sadeghifar, R. 2007. Estimating reference evapotranspiration using
different methods (Case study: Karaj station). 2007. Iranian’s 9th - national Seminar on
Irrigation& Evaporation Kerman, Iran, 2007. (In Persian)
9.Priestley, C.H.B., and Taylor, R.J. 1972. On the assessment of surface heat flux and
evapotranspiration using large scale parameters. Mon Weather Rev. 100: 81-92.
10.Raghuwanshi, N.S., and Wallender, W.W. 1998. Converting from pan evaporation to
evapotranspiration. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 118: 6. 977-980.
11.Sabziparvar, A.A., Tabari, H., Aeini, A., and Ghafouri, M. 2010. Evaluation ofclassA pan
coefficient models for estimation of reference cropevapotranspiration in cold-semi arid and
warm arid climates.Water Resour. Manage. 24: 909-920.
12.Sabziparvar, A., Tafazoli, F., Zare Abyaneh, H., Mosavi Byegi, M., Ghafouri, M., Mohseni
Movahed, A.A., and Maryanji, Z. 2008. Comparison of some crop reference
evapotranspiration models in a cold semiarid climate to optimize the use of radiation models.
J. Water Soil. 22: 2. 328-340. (In Persian)
13.Sentelhas, P.C., Gillespie, T.J., and Santos, E.A. 2010. Evaluation of FAO Penman-Monteith
and alternativemethods for estimating reference evapotranspirationwith missing data in
Southern Ontario, Canada. Agricultural Water Management. 97: 5. 635-644.
14.Tabari, H., Grismer, M.E., and Trajkovic, S. 2013. Comparative analysis of 31 reference
evapotranspiration methods under humid conditions. Irrig. Sci. 31: 107-117.
15.Trajkovic, S. 2007. Hargreaves versus Penman-Monteith under Humid Condition. J. Irrig.
Drain. Eng. ASCE. 133: 38-42.
16.Trajkovic, S., and Kolakovic, S. 2009. Evaluation of reference evapotranspiration equations
under humid conditions. Water Resources Management. 23: 14. 3057-3067.
17.Turc, L. 1961. Evaluation des besoins en eau irrigation, l’evapotranspirationpotentielle.
Ann. Agron. 12: 13-49.