评估不同时间尺度下彭曼蒸发蒸腾率和彭曼-蒙蒂斯蒸发蒸腾率的偏差

IF 5.9 1区 地球科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
Yizhi Han , Salvatore Calabrese , Huihua Du , Jun Yin
{"title":"评估不同时间尺度下彭曼蒸发蒸腾率和彭曼-蒙蒂斯蒸发蒸腾率的偏差","authors":"Yizhi Han ,&nbsp;Salvatore Calabrese ,&nbsp;Huihua Du ,&nbsp;Jun Yin","doi":"10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.131534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The Penman and Penman–Monteith equations are widely used for estimating surface evapotranspiration (ET) at regional and global scales. These nonlinear equations were derived from the turbulent transport of heat fluxes and, in theory, need to be applied to a temporal scale ranging from half hour to an hour. However, these equations have been frequently applied with hydrometeorological variables averaged at daily, monthly, and even decadal time intervals, resulting in biases due to their nonlinearities. In this study, we used global reanalysis data and Taylor expanded Penman and Penman–Monteith equations to explore their nonlinear components and the biases associated with the timescale mismatches. We found that global average biases for approximating Penman equation range from 0.72 to 1.31 mm day<sup>−1</sup> from daily to annual timescales, which mainly stem from the temperature–radiation, temperature–vapor pressure deficit (VPD), and aerodynamic conductance–VPD covariances. For Penman–Monteith equation, the corresponding biases vary from 0.47 to 0.53 mm day<sup>−1</sup>, which may be associated with the addition of stomatal conductance–VPD covariances. As a reference, the global averages from Penman and Penman–Monteith at hourly timescale over one year are 7.1 and 1.7 mm day<sup>−1</sup>. Large biases also exist around the world across various climate zones, where one or multiple covariances between meteorological variables makes the first-order approximations of Penman and Penman–Monteith equations less accurate. This analysis serves as a reminder of nonlinearities in Penman and Penman–Monteith equations, hence the requirement of data at high temporal resolution for estimating potential or actual evapotranspiration.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":362,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hydrology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating biases in Penman and Penman–Monteith evapotranspiration rates at different timescales\",\"authors\":\"Yizhi Han ,&nbsp;Salvatore Calabrese ,&nbsp;Huihua Du ,&nbsp;Jun Yin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.131534\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The Penman and Penman–Monteith equations are widely used for estimating surface evapotranspiration (ET) at regional and global scales. These nonlinear equations were derived from the turbulent transport of heat fluxes and, in theory, need to be applied to a temporal scale ranging from half hour to an hour. However, these equations have been frequently applied with hydrometeorological variables averaged at daily, monthly, and even decadal time intervals, resulting in biases due to their nonlinearities. In this study, we used global reanalysis data and Taylor expanded Penman and Penman–Monteith equations to explore their nonlinear components and the biases associated with the timescale mismatches. We found that global average biases for approximating Penman equation range from 0.72 to 1.31 mm day<sup>−1</sup> from daily to annual timescales, which mainly stem from the temperature–radiation, temperature–vapor pressure deficit (VPD), and aerodynamic conductance–VPD covariances. For Penman–Monteith equation, the corresponding biases vary from 0.47 to 0.53 mm day<sup>−1</sup>, which may be associated with the addition of stomatal conductance–VPD covariances. As a reference, the global averages from Penman and Penman–Monteith at hourly timescale over one year are 7.1 and 1.7 mm day<sup>−1</sup>. Large biases also exist around the world across various climate zones, where one or multiple covariances between meteorological variables makes the first-order approximations of Penman and Penman–Monteith equations less accurate. This analysis serves as a reminder of nonlinearities in Penman and Penman–Monteith equations, hence the requirement of data at high temporal resolution for estimating potential or actual evapotranspiration.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":362,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hydrology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hydrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022169424009302\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, CIVIL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hydrology","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022169424009302","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

彭曼方程和彭曼-蒙蒂斯方程被广泛用于估算区域和全球范围内的地表蒸散量(ET)。这些非线性方程是从热通量的湍流传输中推导出来的,理论上需要应用于半小时到一小时的时间尺度。然而,这些方程经常被应用于按日、月甚至十年时间间隔平均的水文气象变量,从而导致其非线性偏差。在这项研究中,我们使用全球再分析数据和泰勒扩展彭曼方程和彭曼-蒙蒂斯方程,探讨了它们的非线性成分以及与时间尺度不匹配相关的偏差。我们发现,从日时间尺度到年时间尺度,近似彭曼方程的全球平均偏差在 0.72 到 1.31 毫米/天-1 之间,主要来自温度-辐射、温度-蒸气压差(VPD)和空气动力传导-蒸气压差协方差。对于彭曼-蒙蒂斯方程,相应的偏差从 0.47 毫米/天-1 到 0.53 毫米/天-1 不等,这可能与增加了气孔导度-VPD 协方差有关。作为参考,Penman 和 Penman-Monteith 以小时为时间尺度计算的一年全球平均值分别为 7.1 和 1.7 毫米/天-1。全球各气候带也存在较大偏差,气象变量之间的一个或多个协方差使得彭曼方程和彭曼-蒙蒂斯方程的一阶近似值不够准确。这一分析提醒我们注意彭曼方程和彭曼-蒙蒂斯方程的非线性,因此需要高时间分辨率的数据来估算潜在或实际蒸散量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating biases in Penman and Penman–Monteith evapotranspiration rates at different timescales

The Penman and Penman–Monteith equations are widely used for estimating surface evapotranspiration (ET) at regional and global scales. These nonlinear equations were derived from the turbulent transport of heat fluxes and, in theory, need to be applied to a temporal scale ranging from half hour to an hour. However, these equations have been frequently applied with hydrometeorological variables averaged at daily, monthly, and even decadal time intervals, resulting in biases due to their nonlinearities. In this study, we used global reanalysis data and Taylor expanded Penman and Penman–Monteith equations to explore their nonlinear components and the biases associated with the timescale mismatches. We found that global average biases for approximating Penman equation range from 0.72 to 1.31 mm day−1 from daily to annual timescales, which mainly stem from the temperature–radiation, temperature–vapor pressure deficit (VPD), and aerodynamic conductance–VPD covariances. For Penman–Monteith equation, the corresponding biases vary from 0.47 to 0.53 mm day−1, which may be associated with the addition of stomatal conductance–VPD covariances. As a reference, the global averages from Penman and Penman–Monteith at hourly timescale over one year are 7.1 and 1.7 mm day−1. Large biases also exist around the world across various climate zones, where one or multiple covariances between meteorological variables makes the first-order approximations of Penman and Penman–Monteith equations less accurate. This analysis serves as a reminder of nonlinearities in Penman and Penman–Monteith equations, hence the requirement of data at high temporal resolution for estimating potential or actual evapotranspiration.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Hydrology
Journal of Hydrology 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
1309
审稿时长
7.5 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Hydrology publishes original research papers and comprehensive reviews in all the subfields of the hydrological sciences including water based management and policy issues that impact on economics and society. These comprise, but are not limited to the physical, chemical, biogeochemical, stochastic and systems aspects of surface and groundwater hydrology, hydrometeorology and hydrogeology. Relevant topics incorporating the insights and methodologies of disciplines such as climatology, water resource systems, hydraulics, agrohydrology, geomorphology, soil science, instrumentation and remote sensing, civil and environmental engineering are included. Social science perspectives on hydrological problems such as resource and ecological economics, environmental sociology, psychology and behavioural science, management and policy analysis are also invited. Multi-and interdisciplinary analyses of hydrological problems are within scope. The science published in the Journal of Hydrology is relevant to catchment scales rather than exclusively to a local scale or site.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信