2021
DOI: 10.1007/s00704-021-03747-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intercomparison and uncertainty assessment of methods for estimating evapotranspiration using a high-resolution gridded weather dataset over Brazil

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…PPT is the precipitation, ET is the real evapotranspiration and PET is the potential evapotranspiration which was calculated using the Hargreaves method because of the available measured data. Hargreaves has shown to reach acceptable estimations for Cerrado and Amazon Forest (Ferreira et al, 2021; Monteiro et al, 2021).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…PPT is the precipitation, ET is the real evapotranspiration and PET is the potential evapotranspiration which was calculated using the Hargreaves method because of the available measured data. Hargreaves has shown to reach acceptable estimations for Cerrado and Amazon Forest (Ferreira et al, 2021; Monteiro et al, 2021).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hargreaves has shown to reach acceptable estimations for Cerrado and Amazon Forest (Ferreira et al, 2021;Monteiro et al, 2021).…”
Section: Identification and Attribution Of Hydrological Changes In Lo...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For practical purposes, it is common to estimate ET, using different methods based on water balance, land surface model simulation, and satellite remote sensing. However, these methodologies have a coarse spatiotemporal resolution, inconsistency in data sources, and a gap in plant-atmosphere interactions (Monteiro et al 2021). In contrast, ET estimation methods, based on weather or climatic variables, can have high spatiotemporal resolution and can result in more accurate and representative estimates of ET (Gharbia et The standard ET estimation method recommended by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), is the Penman-Monteith method parametrized in Irrigation and Drainage Bulletin nº 56 (PM -FAO56) (Allen et al 1998).…”
Section: ; Zeng Et Al 2017)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, PM-FAO56 method may present disadvantages when used in climate and water balance studies that need long-term climate data (Oudin et al 2005 For the aforementioned reasons, simpler empirical methods are justi ed in the absence of input data for the PM-FAO56 method (Tanguy et al 2018). The empirical methods differ by input data, degree of complexity, functional relationships, time scale (daily or monthly), and applicability (Monteiro et al 2021). Among them, the Thornthwaite (1948) method is globally an optimum candidate because it estimates the potential evapotranspiration (PET) based solely on air temperature and photoperiod (maximum daylength) (Pereira and Camargo 1989;Pereira and Pruitt 2004;Ahmadi and Fooladmand 2008).…”
Section: ; Zeng Et Al 2017)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation