Next Article in Journal
Correction: Niculescu, S., et al. Synergy of High-Resolution Radar and Optical Images Satellite for Identification and Mapping of Wetland Macrophytes on the Danube Delta. Remote Sensing 2020, 12(14), 2188
Previous Article in Journal
NOx Emission Flux Measurements with Multiple Mobile-DOAS Instruments in Beijing
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Comparison of SSEBop-Model-Based Evapotranspiration with Eight Evapotranspiration Products in the Yellow River Basin, China

1
Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
2
College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China
3
The College of Land Engineering, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710000, China
4
State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Remote Sens. 2020, 12(16), 2528; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12162528
Submission received: 16 July 2020 / Revised: 31 July 2020 / Accepted: 3 August 2020 / Published: 6 August 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Remote Sensing in Agriculture and Vegetation)

Abstract

Accurate evapotranspiration (ET) estimation is important in understanding the hydrological cycle and improving water resource management. The operational simplified surface energy balance (SSEBop) model can be set up quickly for the routine monitoring of ET. Several studies have suggested that the SSEBop model, which can simulate ET, has performed inconsistently across the United States. There are few detailed studies on the evaluation of ET simulated by SSEBop in other regions. To explore the potential and application scope of the SSEBop model, more evaluation of the ET simulated by SSEBop is clearly needed. We calculated the SSEBop-model-based ET (ETSSEBopYRB) with land surface temperature product of MOD11A2 and climate variables as inputs for the Yellow River Basin (YRB), China. We also compared the ETSSEBopYRB with eight coarse resolution ET products, including China ETMTE, produced using the upscaling energy flux method; China ETCR, which is generated using the non-linear complementary relationship model; three global products based on the Penman–Monteith logic (ETPMLv2, ETMODIS, and ETBESS), two global ET products based on the surface energy balance (ETSEBS, ETSSEBopGlo), and integrated ET products based on the Bayesian model averaging method (ETGLASS), using the annual ET data derived from the water balance method (WB-ET) for fourteen catchments. We found that ETSSEBopYRB and the other eight ET products were able to explain 23 to 52% of the variability in the water balance ET for fourteen small catchments in the YRB. ETSSEBopYRB had a better agreement with WB-ET than ETSEBS, ETMODIS, ETCR, and ETGLASS, with lower RMSE (88.3 mm yr−1 vs. 121.7 mm yr−1), higher R2 (0.49 vs. 0.43), and lower absolute RPE (−3.3% vs. –19.9%) values for the years 2003–2015. We also found that the uncertainties of the spatial patterns of the average annual ET values and the ET trends were still large for different ET products. Third, we found that the free global ET product derived from the SSEBop model (ETSSEBopGlo) highly underestimated the annual total ET trend for the YRB. The poor performance of the land surface temperature product of MOD11A2 in 2015 caused the large ETSSEBopYRB uncertainty at eight-day and monthly scales. Further evaluation of ET based on the SSEBop model for site measurements is needed.
Keywords: evapotranspiration; operational simplified surface energy balance model; Yellow River Basin evapotranspiration; operational simplified surface energy balance model; Yellow River Basin
Graphical Abstract

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yin, L.; Wang, X.; Feng, X.; Fu, B.; Chen, Y. A Comparison of SSEBop-Model-Based Evapotranspiration with Eight Evapotranspiration Products in the Yellow River Basin, China. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 2528. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12162528

AMA Style

Yin L, Wang X, Feng X, Fu B, Chen Y. A Comparison of SSEBop-Model-Based Evapotranspiration with Eight Evapotranspiration Products in the Yellow River Basin, China. Remote Sensing. 2020; 12(16):2528. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12162528

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yin, Lichang, Xiaofeng Wang, Xiaoming Feng, Bojie Fu, and Yongzhe Chen. 2020. "A Comparison of SSEBop-Model-Based Evapotranspiration with Eight Evapotranspiration Products in the Yellow River Basin, China" Remote Sensing 12, no. 16: 2528. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12162528

APA Style

Yin, L., Wang, X., Feng, X., Fu, B., & Chen, Y. (2020). A Comparison of SSEBop-Model-Based Evapotranspiration with Eight Evapotranspiration Products in the Yellow River Basin, China. Remote Sensing, 12(16), 2528. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12162528

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop