4.7 Article

Short-term forecasting of daily reference evapotranspiration using the Penman-Monteith model and public weather forecasts

期刊

AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT
卷 177, 期 -, 页码 329-339

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2016.08.020

关键词

Reference evapotranspiration; Irrigation demand forecast; Public weather forecast; Weather variables; Penman-Monteith model

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [51179048, 51579184]
  2. Water Resources Department of Jiangxi Province [KT201427, KJ201409]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Short-term daily reference evapotranspiration (ETo) forecasts are required to facilitate real-time irrigation decision making. We forecasted daily 7-day-ahead ETo using the Penman-Monteith (PM) model and public weather forecasts. Public weather forecast data, including daily maximum and minimum temperatures, weather types and wind scales, for six stations located in a wide range of climate zones of China were collected. Weather types and wind scales were converted to sunshine duration and wind speed to forecast ETo. Meanwhile, daily meteorological data for the same period and locations were collected to calculate ETo, which served as reference standard for evaluating forecasting performance. The results showed that the forecasting performance for the minimum temperature was the best, followed by maximum temperature, sunshine duration and wind speed. Also, it was found that using public weather forecasts and the PM model improved the forecasting performance of daily ETo compared to those obtained when using the HS model with temperature forecasts as the only input data, and this improvement was because the weather type and wind scale forecasts also have positive influence on ETo forecasting. Further, the greatest impact on ETo forecasting error was found to be caused by the errors in sunshine duration and wind speed, followed by maximum and minimum temperature forecasts. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据