Show simple item record

dc.contributorWestern, Andrew W.en_US
dc.contributorNawarathna, Bandaraen_US
dc.contributorGeorge, Biju Alummoottilen_US
dc.creatorPerera, Kushan C.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-03T13:15:38Z
dc.date.available2016-05-03T13:15:38Z
dc.identifierhttps://mel.cgiar.org/dspace/limiteden_US
dc.identifier.citationKushan C. Perera, Andrew W. Western, Bandara Nawarathna, Biju Alummoottil George. (15/1/2015). Comparison of hourly and daily reference crop evapotranspiration equations across seasons and climate zones in Australia. Agricultural Water Management, 148, pp. 84-96.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11766/4719
dc.description.abstractEstimates from the FAO Penman–Monteith (FAO-PM) and the standardized ASCE Penman–Monteith(ASCE-PM) hourly and daily reference evapotranspiration (ET0) equations were compared at daily scale,based on the hourly climate data collected from forty (40) geographically and climatologically diverseAutomatic Weather Stations (AWS) across the Australian continent. These locations represent 23 agri-cultural irrigation areas in tropical, arid and temperate climates. The aims of this paper are to: comparethe effects of different methods of estimating Clear-sky-radiation—(Rso); compare sum-of-hourly anddaily ET0; compare the results of aggregation of hourly ET0over 24 h compared with daylight hours;and examine the impact of seasonality and climate type. At selected AWS locations, the hourly ET0wascalculated using the hourly FAO-PM and the ASCE-PM equations and then summed to derive daily ET0(reported as ET0,soh). This was compared against the daily ET0values, calculated using the correspondingdaily equation (reported as ET0,daily). Using Rsocalculated following the “complex” approach improves theagreement between ET0,sohand ET0,dailyof both hourly equations, compared with the “simple” approach.Better agreement between ET0,sohand ET0,dailyestimates for the FAO-PM and ASCE-PM were found, whenthe hourly values are aggregated over 24 h rather than over daylight hours. The average ratio betweenET0,sohand ET0,dailyfor the FAO-PM and ASCE-PM equations is 0.95 and 1.00, respectively. The range ofthe former is 0.90–0.98 and that of the latter is 0.96–1.04. There was very strong correlation between thetwo hourly equations at the daily time step: on average 0.997, with a range of 0.993–0.998. The resultsimply that the ASCE-PM hourly equation’s daily ET0values are higher than those of FAO-PM, which canbe explained by the difference in the treatment of surface resistances. Better agreements between ET0,sohand ET0,dailyvalues for winter, spring and autumn were found for the FAO-PM version, while during sum-mer, the ASCE-PM version showed better agreement. The best agreement between the hourly and dailyresults for the FAO-PM version was found in temperate climates and the ASCE-PM version showed bestagreement in the tropical and arid climates.en_US
dc.formatPDFen_US
dc.languageenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.sourceAgricultural Water Management;148,(2014) Pagination 84-96en_US
dc.subjectet0en_US
dc.subjectfao-56en_US
dc.subjectasce-pmen_US
dc.subjecthourly et0en_US
dc.subjectdaily et0en_US
dc.subjectreference evapotranspirationen_US
dc.subjectcropen_US
dc.titleComparison of hourly and daily reference crop evapotranspiration equations across seasons and climate zones in Australiaen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dcterms.available2014-10-04en_US
dcterms.extent84-96en_US
dcterms.issued2015-01-15en_US
cg.creator.idGeorge, Biju Alummoottil: 0000-0002-8427-3350en_US
cg.contributor.centerInternational Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas - ICARDAen_US
cg.contributor.centerThe University of Melbourne, Department of Infrastructure Engineeringen_US
cg.contributor.centerThe Bureau of Meteorology, Australia Environment and Research Divisionen_US
cg.contributor.centerThe University of Melbourne - UNIMELBen_US
cg.contributor.crpCGIAR Research Program on Dryland Systems - DSen_US
cg.contributor.funderCGIAR System Organization - CGIARen_US
cg.contributor.project-lead-instituteInternational Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas - ICARDAen_US
cg.date.embargo-end-dateTimelessen_US
cg.coverage.regionAustralia and New Zealanden_US
cg.coverage.countryAUen_US
cg.contactkushanr@student.unimelb.edu.auen_US
cg.identifier.doihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.09.016en_US
cg.isijournalISI Journalen_US
dc.identifier.statusTimeless limited accessen_US
mel.impact-factor3.182en_US
cg.issn0378-3774en_US
cg.journalAgricultural Water Managementen_US
cg.volume148en_US


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
Disclaimer:
MELSpace content providers and partners accept no liability to any consequence resulting from use of the content or data made available in this repository. Users of this content assume full responsibility for compliance with all relevant national or international regulations and legislation.
Theme by 
Atmire NV