Evaluating evapotranspiration estimation methods in APEX model for dryland cropping systems in a semi-arid region

Haile K. Tadesse, Daniel N. Moriasi, Prasanna H. Gowda, Gary Marek, Jean L. Steiner, David Brauer, Mansour Talebizadeh, Amanda Nelson and Patrick Starks

Agricultural Water Management, 2018, vol. 206, issue C, 217-228

Abstract: Evapotranspiration (ET), is a major component of the hydrologic budget and therefore it requires accurate estimation. The Agricultural Policy/Environmental eXtender (APEX), a hydrologic and water quality model developed for evaluating the effect of agricultural production management practices on the environment. It has five different methods to simulate ET. The objectives of this study were to: determine the impact of using different ET methods in APEX on sensitive ET parameters in semi-arid environments, determine reasonable range of values for sensitive parameters, and compare performance of these methods using multiple criteria. ET and crop yield data measured in the Lysimeter fields located in the USDA-ARS Conservation and Production Research Laboratory, Bushland, Texas were used to calibrate and validate the model. Results indicated that selection of statistical model performance measure and ET method affects the number of sensitive parameters and parameter rank. The number of sensitive parameters remained relatively stable among ET simulation methods but there was large variability in parameter sensitivity ranks. It is also important that users carefully choose appropriate statistical measure to use depending on the goals of their study. With the exception of maximum rainfall intercept, exponent coefficient rainfall, SCS index coefficient, rain intercept coefficient, and root growth soil strength, all methods had similar ranges of values for the sensitive parameters. In general there were no large differences in the performance of ET methods. However, Penman-Monteith method simulated ET relatively better than the other methods, which may be explained by the fact that it is a physically-based method with many weather variables whose data was available for the study area. However, the study findings indicate that the other ET methods can provide satisfactory results in regions with limited weather data.

Keywords: Calibration; Multi-comparison criteria; ET methods; Sensitivity analysis; Validation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377418303482
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:206:y:2018:i:c:p:217-228

DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2018.04.007

Access Statistics for this article

Agricultural Water Management is currently edited by B.E. Clothier, W. Dierickx, J. Oster and D. Wichelns

More articles in Agricultural Water Management from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().