Next Article in Journal
Influence of Meteorological Factors on the Potential Evapotranspiration in Yanhe River Basin, China
Previous Article in Journal
Integrative Approach for Groundwater Pollution Risk Assessment Coupling Hydrogeological, Physicochemical and Socioeconomic Conditions in Southwest of the Damascus Basin
Previous Article in Special Issue
Improving Runoff Simulation and Forecasting with Segmenting Delay of Baseflow from Fast Surface Flow in Montane High-Vegetation-Covered Catchments
Article

Comparing Evapotranspiration Estimates from the GEOframe-Prospero Model with Penman–Monteith and Priestley-Taylor Approaches under Different Climate Conditions

1
CINECA Consorzio Interuniversitario, 40033 Bologna, Italy
2
Department of Civil, Environmental and Mechanical Engineering, University of Trento, 38123 Trento, Italy
3
Institute for Mediterranean Agricultural and Forestry Systems (ISAFOM), National Research Council (CNR), 80055 Portici, Italy
4
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Salerno, 84084 Fisciano, Italy
5
Institute for Alpine Environment, Eurac Research, 39100 Bolzano, Italy
6
C3A—Center Agriculture Food Environment, University of Trento, 38010 San Michele all’Adige, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Gianfranco Rana
Water 2021, 13(9), 1221; https://doi.org/10.3390/w13091221
Received: 31 March 2021 / Revised: 23 April 2021 / Accepted: 26 April 2021 / Published: 28 April 2021
Evapotranspiration (ET) is a key variable in the hydrological cycle and it directly impacts the surface balance and its accurate assessment is essential for a correct water management. ET is difficult to measure, since the existing methods for its direct estimate, such as the weighing lysimeter or the eddy-covariance system, are often expensive and require well-trained research personnel. To overcome this limit, different authors developed experimental models for indirect estimation of ET. However, since the accuracy of ET prediction is crucial from different points of view, the continuous search for more and more precise modeling approaches is encouraged. In light of this, the aim of the present work is to test the efficiency in predicting ET fluxes in a newly introduced physical-based model, named Prospero, which is based on the ability to compute the ET using a multi-layer canopy model, solving the energy balance both for the sunlight and shadow vegetation, extending the recently developed Schymanski and Or method to canopy level. Additionally, Prospero is able to compute the actual ET using a Jarvis-like model. The model is integrated as a component in the hydrological modelling system GEOframe. Its estimates were validated against observed data from five Eddy covariance (EC) sites with different climatic conditions and the same vegetation cover. Then, its performances were compared with those of two already consolidated models, the Priestley–Taylor model and Penman FAO model, using four goodness-of-fit indices. Subsequently a calibration of the three methods has been carried out using LUCA calibration within GEOframe, with the purpose of prediction errors. The results showed that Prospero is more accurate and precise with respect to the other two models, even if no calibrations were performed, with better performances in dry climatic conditions. In addition, Prospero model turned to be the least affected by the calibration procedure and, therefore, it can be effectively also used in a context of data scarcity. View Full-Text
Keywords: evapotranspiration; GEOframe–Prospero model; Priestley–Taylor model; Penman–FAO model; calibration evapotranspiration; GEOframe–Prospero model; Priestley–Taylor model; Penman–FAO model; calibration
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Bottazzi, M.; Bancheri, M.; Mobilia, M.; Bertoldi, G.; Longobardi, A.; Rigon, R. Comparing Evapotranspiration Estimates from the GEOframe-Prospero Model with Penman–Monteith and Priestley-Taylor Approaches under Different Climate Conditions. Water 2021, 13, 1221. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13091221

AMA Style

Bottazzi M, Bancheri M, Mobilia M, Bertoldi G, Longobardi A, Rigon R. Comparing Evapotranspiration Estimates from the GEOframe-Prospero Model with Penman–Monteith and Priestley-Taylor Approaches under Different Climate Conditions. Water. 2021; 13(9):1221. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13091221

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bottazzi, Michele; Bancheri, Marialaura; Mobilia, Mirka; Bertoldi, Giacomo; Longobardi, Antonia; Rigon, Riccardo. 2021. "Comparing Evapotranspiration Estimates from the GEOframe-Prospero Model with Penman–Monteith and Priestley-Taylor Approaches under Different Climate Conditions" Water 13, no. 9: 1221. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13091221

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop