Islam Shakibul, Alam A K M Rashidul
Department of Environmental Sciences, Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka-1342, Bangladesh.
Department of Disaster Management, Begum Rokeya University, Rangpur-5400, Bangladesh.
Heliyon. 2021 Jul 7;7(7):e07487. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07487. eCollection 2021 Jul.
Proper assessment of reference evapotranspiration ( ) is necessary for pastoral activity and water management. The Penman-Monteith FAO56 ( ) method has been recommended as the identical estimation model; nonetheless, it belongs to a vast climatic data requirement. There is an urgent need to discover an ideal alternate model for evaluating in particular places where all climatic data is insufficient. The performances of 15 empirical models were assessed to get the best alternative model by comparing it with the PMF-56 model. These 15 models were evaluated by employing a daily scatter plot and three well known numerical approaches: relative root-mean-square error, mean absolute error and Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient in this study. Furthermore, a linear regression model was implemented to calibrate and validate the empirical models' performances throughout the 1981-2005 and 2006-2018 time intervals, separately. The outcomes displayed that the rose primarily and declined later on a monthly period with the topmost amount in April and the lowermost amount in January. Overall, the Abtew model was the best alternate method showing the highest determination coefficient values more than 0.85 from January to December. In contrast, the Penman, WMO, Trabert, Valiantzas1, Valiantzas2, Valiantzas3 and Jensen-Haise models presented moderate performances with fewer inaccuracies. Afterwards, modification, the version of the above-described models every month has been upgraded deliberately related to actual. The Abtew model had simplicity in the computation process, only used maximum temperature and solar radiation data and linearly well connected to the PMF-56 model.
正确评估参考作物蒸散量( )对于牧业活动和水资源管理至关重要。联合国粮农组织56号彭曼-蒙特斯( )方法被推荐为标准的 估算模型;然而,它需要大量的气候数据。迫切需要找到一种理想的替代模型,用于在所有气候数据不足的特定地区评估 。通过将15个经验模型与PMF-56模型进行比较,评估了这些模型的性能,以找到最佳替代模型。在本研究中,采用每日散点图和三种著名的数值方法:相对均方根误差、平均绝对误差和纳什-萨特克利夫系数对这15个模型进行了评估。此外,还实施了线性回归模型,分别在1981 - 2005年和2006 - 2018年时间间隔内校准和验证经验模型的性能。结果显示, 在月度周期内先上升后下降,4月最高,1月最低。总体而言,阿特尤模型是最佳替代方法,从1月到12月显示出最高的决定系数值超过0.85。相比之下,彭曼、世界气象组织、特拉伯特、瓦利安扎斯1、瓦利安扎斯2、瓦利安扎斯3和詹森-海斯模型表现适中,误差较小。之后,对上述模型的每月版本进行了与实际情况相关的刻意改进。阿特尤模型计算过程简单,仅使用最高温度和太阳辐射数据,并且与PMF-56模型线性相关性良好。