Assessment of Empirical Methods for Estimating Reference Evapotranspiration in Different Climatic Zones of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Author:

Srdić Sretenka1,Srđević Zorica2,Stričević Ružica3ORCID,Čereković Nataša4ORCID,Benka Pavel2ORCID,Rudan Nada5,Rajić Milica2,Todorović Mladen6ORCID

Affiliation:

1. System Office, Colorado State University, 4817 National Western Dr., Denver, CO 80216, USA

2. Department of Water Management, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Novi Sad, Trg Dositeja Obradovića 8, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia

3. Department of Soil and Water Management, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade, Nemanjina 6, 11080 Belgrade, Serbia

4. Faculty of Agriculture, University of Banja Luka, Bulevar vojvode Petra Bojovića 1A, 78000 Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina

5. Republic Hydrometeorological Institute, Put banjalučkog odreda bb, 78000 Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina

6. CIHEAM-Bari, Via Ceglie 9, 70010 Valenzano, Italy

Abstract

The study evaluated nine empirical methods for estimating reference evapotranspiration (ETo) in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) across different climatic zones. The methods compared were the Hargreaves–Samani method (HS), the modified Hargreaves–Samani method (HM), the calibrated Hargreaves–Samani method (HC), the Priestley–Taylor method (PT), the Copais method (COP), the Makkink method (MAK), the Penman–Monteith method based on air temperature and overall average windspeed (PMT2), the Penman–Monteith method based on air temperature and regional average windspeed (PMT1.3), and the Penman–Monteith method based on air temperature and site-specific windspeed (PMTlok). These methods were tested against the “Food Agricultural Organization-Penman Monteith approach” (FAO-PM). The evaluation was performed using data from 20 meteorological stations in BiH, considering a common irrigation season (April–October) for two periods (2000–2005 and 2018–2022). The stations represented three climatic zones: semi-arid (SA), dry sub-humid (DSH), and moist sub-humid (MSH). The performance and ranking of the ETo methods were analyzed using the TOPSIS method. The trend of ETo during the common irrigation season for the period from 2018 to 2022 was determined using the Mann–Kendall test. The results of the study indicated that the HC method showed the best performance across all three climatic zones. The average root mean square error (RMSE) was 0.67 mm day−1, 0.49 mm day−1, and 0.50 mm day−1 for the SA, DSH, and MSH zones, respectively. As an alternative to the HC method, the PT method is recommended for its favorable results in both periods and in all zones. On the other hand, the HS method exhibited the highest average overestimation, particularly in the MSH zone, where ETo values were 18% higher compared with those of the FAO-PM method. The COP method also showed high overestimation and was not recommended for use. Regarding the MAK method, it resulted in underestimation during the period from 2000 to 2005, ranging from 17% in the DSH zone to 11% in the MSH zone. However, its performance improved during the period from 2018 to 2022, for which it ranked second place in the MSH zone. Among the PMT methods, the PMTlok, which utilized local average windspeed, yielded the best results. Despite performing well in the neighboring country of Serbia, the HM method showed poor overall performance in BiH. The findings of this study can serve as a foundation for further research in BiH to enhance irrigation practices in response to climate changes.

Funder

European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Water Science and Technology,Aquatic Science,Geography, Planning and Development,Biochemistry

Reference78 articles.

1. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., and Smith, M. (1998). Crop Evapotranspiration: Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

2. ‘Breathing’ of the terrestrial biosphere: Lessons learned from a global network of carbon dioxide flux measurement systems;Baldocchi;Aust. J. Bot.,2008

3. The case for increasing the statistical power of eddy covariance ecosystem studies: Why, where and how?;Hill;Glob. Chang. Biol.,2017

4. Strong correspondence in evapotranspiration and carbon dioxide fluxes between different eddy covariance systems enables quantification of landscape heterogeneity in dryland fluxes;Cunliffe;J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci.,2022

5. Estimating Precipitation and Actual Evapotranspiration from Precision Lysimeter Measurements;Schrader;J. Procedia Environ. Sci.,2013

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3