Comparison of Two Satellite‐Based Evapotranspiration Models of the Nagqu River Basin of the Tibetan Plateau. Issue 8 (21st April 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zou, Mijun; Zhong, Lei; Ma, Yaoming; Hu, Yuanyuan; Huang, Ziyu; Xu, Kepiao; Feng, Lu
• Is Part Of: Journal of geophysical research. Volume 123:Issue 8(2018)
• Page Start: 3961
• Page End: 3975
• Publication Date: 2018-04-21
• Subjects: evapotranspiration -- TESEBS -- Priestley‐Taylor -- Nagqu River Basin; Atmospheric physics -- Periodicals; Geophysics -- Periodicals; 551.5
• DOI: 10.1002/2017JD027965
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2169-897X

Abstract

Abstract: Evapotranspiration (ET) is one of the major uncertain components of the energy and water cycle and was derived for the Nagqu River Basin based on remote sensing data and atmospheric surface layer observations under cloudless conditions. Two process‐based models were used to determine the ET: a Priestley‐Taylor (PT)‐based model and a topographical enhanced surface energy balance system (TESEBS) model. Improved broadband albedo, downward shortwave radiation flux, and reconstructed normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) were coupled into the TESEBS model and PT‐based model to estimate the actual ET. The atmospheric surface layer meteorological data, SPOT Vegetation (VGT) data, and Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer data were used as inputs for 10‐day ET calculations. The model‐estimated results were compared with ground truths calculated via the combinatory method. The results indicated that the ET determined by both models well fit the actual ET, with correlation coefficients ( R ) of 0.88 and 0.82, respectively. However, the TESEBS model showed a better performance than the PT model, with a lower mean bias error (−0.02 mm/hr) and lower root–mean‐square error (0.08 mm/hr). Although the PT model is computationally simple and requires few parameters, the strong weighting of the NDVI may lead to some overestimations, especially during the growing season. Key Points: The evapotranspiration determined by both models well fit the actual values TESEBS showed a better performance than PT model Although the PT model is computationally simple and requires few parameters, the strong weighting of NDVI may lead to some overestimations