4.7 Article

A Comprehensive Evaluation of Five Evapotranspiration Datasets Based on Ground and GRACE Satellite Observations: Implications for Improvement of Evapotranspiration Retrieval Algorithm

Journal

REMOTE SENSING
Volume 13, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs13122414

Keywords

actual evapotranspiration reconstruction; water balance; remote sensing; evapotranspiration evaluation

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [52009028, 51879067]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFC1508101]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2020M671323]
  4. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20180022]
  5. Six Talent Peaks Project in Jiangsu Province [NY-004]
  6. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China [B210202115, B200204038]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study compared the performance of five typical remote sensing evapotranspiration datasets and found that P-LSH and GLEAM performed the best at the annual scale, P-LSH outperformed the other four datasets at the seasonal scale, while MTE and PML showed higher accuracy in arid regions. MODIS and MTE tended to underestimate and overestimate ET values during estimation.
Evapotranspiration (ET) is a vital part of the hydrological cycle and the water-energy balance. To explore the characteristics of five typical remote sensing evapotranspiration datasets and provide guidance for algorithm development, we used reconstructed evapotranspiration (Recon) data based on ground and GRACE satellite observations as a benchmark and evaluated five remote sensing datasets for 592 watersheds across the continental United States. The Global Land Evaporation Amsterdam Model (GLEAM) dataset (with bias and RMSE values of 23.18 mm/year and 106.10 mm/year, respectively), process-based land surface evapotranspiration/heat flux (P-LSH) dataset (bias = 22.94 mm/year and RMSE = 114.44 mm/year) and the Penman-Monteith-Leuning (PML) algorithm generated ET dataset (bias = -17.73 mm/year and RMSE = 108.97 mm/year) showed the better performance on a yearly scale, followed by the model tree ensemble (MTE) dataset (bias = 99.45 mm/year and RMSE = 141.32 mm/year) and the moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS) dataset (bias = -106.71 mm/year and RMSE = 158.90 mm/year). The P-LSH dataset outperformed the other four ET datasets on a seasonal scale, especially from March to August. Both PML and MTE showed better overall accuracy and could accurately capture the spatial variability of evapotranspiration in arid regions. The P-LSH and GLEAM products were consistent with the Recon data in middle-value section. MODIS and MTE had larger bias and RMSE values on a yearly scale, whereby the MODIS and MTE datasets tended to underestimate and overestimate ET values in all the sections, respectively. In the future, the aim should be to reduce bias in the MODIS and MTE algorithms and further improve seasonality of the ET estimation in the GLEAM algorithm, while the estimation accuracy of the P-LSH and MODIS algorithms should be improved in arid regions. Our analysis suggests that combining artificial intelligence algorithms or data-driven algorithms and physical process algorithms will further improve the accuracy of ET estimation algorithms and the quality of ET datasets, as well as enhancing their capacity to be applied in different climate regions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available