PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
November 1, 1995Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering229 citations

Comparison of Methods for Estimating REF-ET

View Full Paper
DADevendra M. AmatyaRSR. W. SkaggsJGJames D. Gregory

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

The Penman-Monteith, Makkink, Priestley-Taylor, Turc, Hargreaves-Samani, and Thornthwaite methods were used to estimate reference evapotranspiration (REF-ET) at three sites in eastern North Carolina. The Penman-Monteith method with grass as the reference crop was selected as the standard of comparison for evaluating the other five methods. Good correlation was found between the REF-ET values estimated by each of the five radiation- and temperature-based methods and the Penman-Monteith method, although there were some differences. Based on the statistical analyses, the methods that performed the best in estimating daily and seasonal Penman-Monteith REF-ET at each location were recommended. Reliability of the radiation methods was also evaluated when data from another site were used. Penman-Monteith estimates were used to develop correction factors for their potential use in the temperature-based Thornthwaite and Hargreaves methods at each location and in the study areas in general.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Amatya et al. (1995) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1bf4065b8f4ede65a94a01https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9437(1995)121:6(427)
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper