Two source energy balance maize evapotranspiration estimates using close-canopy mobile infrared sensors and upscaling methods under variable water stress conditions

Abia Katimbo, Daran R. Rudnick, Wei zhen Liang, Kendall C. DeJonge, Tsz Him Lo, Trenton E. Franz, Yufeng Ge, Xin Qiao, Isa Kabenge, Hope Njuki Nakabuye, Jiaming Duan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Mobile infrared thermometers (IRTs) mounted on moving platforms provide one-time-of-day radiometric measurements (Tr), which can be used to calculate instantaneous actual evapotranspiration (ETa) using the two-source energy balance (TSEB) model. However, irrigation scheduling decisions utilize daily ETa estimates, hence the need for time scaling. This study evaluated different upscaling methods to calculate daily maize ETa using one-time-of day Tr under varying water stress conditions. Mobile IRTs were mounted on a high clearance mobile sensing platform and collected Tr in remote locations under full, deficit and rainfed conditions. Seven scaling methods via two pathways were employed to obtain daily ETa. First pathway was scaling one-time-of-day Tr (SC) whereas the second pathway involved use of six upscaling methods of instantaneous ETa including: original and modified evaporative factor ((EF)o, (EF)m) as well as crop coefficient ((Kc)o, (Kc)m), direct canopy resistance (Direct- rc), and solar radiation ratio (Rn/Rs); and all were compared to a neutron-based soil water balance (SWB) determined ETa. From the results, SC outperformed other methods in comparison to SWB ETa across all the selected treatments with smaller discrepancies and lower RMSE (0.9–1.7 mm d−1 vs. 0.7–4.3 mm d−1 for other methods). Furthermore, methods including SC, (EF)o, (EF)m, and Rn/Rs had their daily average ETa values in close agreement to SWB ETa with mean ETa differences ranging between 0.2 and 1.6 mm d−1. Overall, SC method performed better in fully irrigated maize (r2 = 0.52, RMSE = 0.9 mm d−1) than in deficit irrigated maize ( r2 = 0.48, RMSE = 1.4 mm d−1) but worst in rainfed maize (r2 = 0.16, RMSE = 1.7 mm d−1). This implies that SC is more suited for irrigated rather than rainfed settings. Importantly, the choice of any method depends on data requirements, irrigation water management strategy, and ETa estimation accuracy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number107972
JournalAgricultural Water Management
Volume274
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2022

Keywords

  • Irrigation scheduling
  • Mobile infrared thermometers
  • Moving platforms
  • Radiometric temperature
  • Soil water balance
  • Time scaling methods

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agronomy and Crop Science
  • Water Science and Technology
  • Soil Science
  • Earth-Surface Processes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Two source energy balance maize evapotranspiration estimates using close-canopy mobile infrared sensors and upscaling methods under variable water stress conditions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this