Next Article in Journal
Satellite-Driven Evaluation of Ecological Environmental Quality Based on the PSR Framework
Previous Article in Journal
Method of Convolutional Neural Networks for Lithological Classification Using Multisource Remote Sensing Data
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Satellite-Based Assessment of Divergent Carbon–Water Trends: Vegetation Greening Coincides with Declining Water Use Efficiency in the Haihe River Basin (2001–2023)
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

Assessing the Performance of Multiple Satellite-Based Evapotranspiration Models over Tropical Forests

by
Leonardo Laipelt
1,*,
Ayan Santos Fleischmann
2 and
Anderson Ruhoff
1
1
Instituto de Pesquisas Hidráulicas, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre 91501-970, RS, Brazil
2
Instituto de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Mamirauá, Tefé, 69470-000, AM, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Remote Sens. 2026, 18(1), 30; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18010030
Submission received: 28 October 2025 / Revised: 4 December 2025 / Accepted: 16 December 2025 / Published: 22 December 2025

Abstract

Tropical forests are critical regulators of global water and energy cycles, with evapotranspiration (ET) being a key ecohydrological process. However, monitoring ET over tropical forests is a challenge due to their complex structure, and the logistical difficulties in obtaining observations that are both spatially representative and have wide coverage. Remote sensing data offer an alternative to these limitations, although the effectiveness of ET remote sensing-based models over these areas is not well-known. Thus, this study evaluates the performance of four remote sensing-based ET models (SSEBop, geeSEBAL, PT-JPL and T-SEB) in tropical forests. We compared models’ estimations against flux tower observations and assessed the uncertainty in models’ outputs driven by different meteorological input forcings. Additionally, we conducted a spatial–temporal analysis of models’ response to the impact of deforestation on ET patterns. Our results showed a good agreement between modeled and observed ET using the most accurate meteorological input dataset (RMSEs ranging from 1.1 to 1.3 mm.day−1 for ERA5-Land). The deforestation analysis for sites in Africa, America and Asia revealed an agreement of the models in demonstrating the impact of deforestation on ET, though performance varied due to different deforestation patterns. For the long-term results, models showed different responses to forest removal, highlighting the uncertainties of the individual models and underscoring the necessity of multi-model approaches in providing more accurate information. These findings demonstrate that current high-resolution remote sensing models can effectively monitor ET in tropical forests on a global scale, especially for assessing the impacts of deforestation in data-scarce regions.
Keywords: remote sensing; deforestation; landsat remote sensing; deforestation; landsat

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Laipelt, L.; Fleischmann, A.S.; Ruhoff, A. Assessing the Performance of Multiple Satellite-Based Evapotranspiration Models over Tropical Forests. Remote Sens. 2026, 18, 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18010030

AMA Style

Laipelt L, Fleischmann AS, Ruhoff A. Assessing the Performance of Multiple Satellite-Based Evapotranspiration Models over Tropical Forests. Remote Sensing. 2026; 18(1):30. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18010030

Chicago/Turabian Style

Laipelt, Leonardo, Ayan Santos Fleischmann, and Anderson Ruhoff. 2026. "Assessing the Performance of Multiple Satellite-Based Evapotranspiration Models over Tropical Forests" Remote Sensing 18, no. 1: 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18010030

APA Style

Laipelt, L., Fleischmann, A. S., & Ruhoff, A. (2026). Assessing the Performance of Multiple Satellite-Based Evapotranspiration Models over Tropical Forests. Remote Sensing, 18(1), 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs18010030

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