Latent heat flux over a furrow-irrigated tomato crop using Penman–Monteith equation with a variable surface canopy resistance |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Research and Extension Center for Irrigation and Agroclimatology (CITRA), Universidad de Talca, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Av. Lircay s/n, Casilla 747, Talca, Chile;2. Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), Unité Climat, Sol et Environnement, Domaine St. Paul, Site Agroparc, 84914 Avignon Cedex 9, France;3. School of Science, Food and Horticulture, University of Western Sydney, Bldg. S8 Hawkesbury Campus Locked Bag 1797, Penrith South DC 1797, Sydney, Australia;4. UMR SYSTEM (INRA Montpellier), CIRAD TA40/01, Av. Agropolis, 34398 Montpellie Cedex 5, France;1. College of Civil Aviation, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, People’s Republic of China;2. British Antarctic Survey, Cambridge CB30ET, UK;1. Mechanical Engineering Division, Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78238, USA;2. Defense Intelligence Solutions Division, Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78238, USA;3. Department of Computer Science, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA;4. Texas Multicore Technologies, Inc., Austin, TX 78728, USA;5. IAC-CNR, Via dei Taurini 19, 00185, Roma, Italy;6. Intelligent Systems Division, Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78238, USA;1. Center for Agricultural Water Research in China, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, China;2. Department of Environmental Sciences, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | The Penman–Monteith (P–M) model with a variable surface canopy resistance (rc) was evaluated to estimate latent heat flux (LE) or crop evapotranspiration (ET) over a furrow-irrigated tomato crop under different soil water status and atmospheric conditions. The hourly values of rc were computed as a function of environmental variables (air temperature, vapor pressure deficit, net radiation, and soil heat flux) and a normalized soil water factor (F), which varies between 0 (wilting point, θWP) and 1 (field capacity, θFC). The Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO-56) method was also evaluated to calculate daily ET based on the reference evapotranspiration, crop coefficient and water stress coefficient. The performance of the P–M model and FAO-56 method were evaluated using LE values obtained from the Bowen ratio system. On a 20 min time interval, the P–M model estimated daytime variation of LE with a standard error of the estimate (SEE) of 46 Wm−2 and an absolute relative error (ARE) of 3.6%. Thus, daily performance of the P–M model was good under soil water content ranging from 118 to 83 mm (θFC and θWP being 125 and 69 mm, respectively) and LAI ranging from 1.3 to 3.0. For this validation period, the calculated values of rc and F ranged between 20 and 114 s m−1 and between 0.87 and 0.25, respectively. In this case, the P–M model was able to predict daily ET with a SEE of 0.44 mm h−1 (1.1 MJ m−2 d−1) and an ARE of 3.9%. Furthermore, the FAO-PM model computed daily ET with SEE and ARE values of 1.1 mm h−1 (2.8 MJ m−2 d−1) and 5.2%, respectively. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
