Sensitivity analysis of a Penman–Monteith type equation to estimate reference evapotranspiration in southern Spain

Sensitivity analysis is crucial in assessing the impact of climatic variables on reference evapotranspiration estimations. The sensitivity of the standardized ASCE–Penman–Monteith evapotranspiration equation for daily estimations to climatic variables has not yet been studied in Spain. Andalusia is located in southern Spain where almost 1 million ha are irrigated under quite different conditions; it has a high inter-annual variability in rainfall. In this study, sensitivity analyses for this equation were carried out for temperature, relative humidity, solar radiation and wind speed data from 87 automatic weather stations, including coastal and inland locations, from 1999 to 2006. Topography and Mediterranean climate characterize the heterogeneous landscape and vegetation of this region. Simulated random and systematic errors have been added to meteorological data to obtain ET0 deviations and sensitivity coefficients for different time periods. BIAS and SEE (standard error of estimate) have been used to evaluate the effect of both types of errors. The results showed a large degree of daily and seasonal variability, especially for temperature and relative humidity. In general, the effect on ET0 values of introduced random errors was larger than that of systematic errors. ET0 overestimations were produced using positive errors in temperature, solar radiation and wind speed data, while these errors in relative humidity resulted in ET0 underestimations. The sensitivity of ET0 to the same climatic variables showed significant differences among locations. The geographical distribution of sensitivity coefficients across this region was also studied. As an example, during spring months, ET0 equation was more sensitive to temperature in stations located along the Guadalquivir Valley. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  M. E. Muller,et al.  A Note on the Generation of Random Normal Deviates , 1958 .

[2]  Chong-Yu Xu,et al.  Sensitivity of the Penman–Monteith reference evapotranspiration to key climatic variables in the Changjiang (Yangtze River) basin , 2006 .

[3]  Christopher A. Fiebrich,et al.  Quality Assurance Procedures in the Oklahoma Mesonetwork , 2000 .

[4]  Donn G. DeCoursey,et al.  Sensitivity and model variance analysis applied to some evaporation and evapotranspiration models , 1976 .

[5]  K. Saxton,et al.  Sensitivity analyses of the combination evapotranspiration equation , 1975 .

[6]  R. J. Gurney,et al.  A Sensitivity Analysis of a Numerical Model for Estimating Evapotranspiration , 1984 .

[7]  Marnik Vanclooster,et al.  Effect of the sampling frequency of meteorological variables on the estimation of the reference evapotranspiration , 2001 .

[8]  H. L. Penman.  Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and grass , 1948, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences.

[9]  Richard G. Allen,et al.  Comparison of Reference Evapotranspiration Calculations as Part of the ASCE Standardization Effort , 2003 .

[10]  R. W. Hill,et al.  Errors in Penman-Wright Alfalfa Reference Evapotranspiration Estimates: II. Effects of Weather Sensor Measurement Variability , 1994 .

[11]  Keith Beven,et al.  A sensitivity analysis of the Penman-Monteith actual evapotranspiration estimates , 1979 .

[12]  Richard H. McCuen,et al.  The role of sensitivity analysis in hydrologic modeling , 1973 .

[13]  D. Wilhite,et al.  Estimating potential evapotranspiration: the effect of random and systematic errors , 1989 .

[14]  C. W. Thornthwaite.  An approach toward a rational classification of climate. , 1948 .

[15]  H. L. Penman,et al.  Vegetation and hydrology , 1963 .

[16]  Richard G. Allen,et al.  Assessing Integrity of Weather Data for Reference Evapotranspiration Estimation , 1996 .

[17]  Jerry L. Hatfield,et al.  Data quality checking for single station meteorological databases , 1994 .

[18]  Derrel L. Martin,et al.  Issues, requirements and challenges in selecting and specifying a standardized ET equation. , 2000 .

[19]  Richard G. Allen,et al.  STANDARDIZED ASCE PENMAN-MONTEITH: IMPACT OF SUM-OF-HOURLY VS. 24-HOUR TIMESTEP COMPUTATIONS AT REFERENCE WEATHER STATION SITES , 2005 .

[20]  R. W. Hill,et al.  Errors in Penman-Wright Alfalfa Reference Evapotranspiration Estimates: I. Model Sensitivity Analyses , 1994 .

[21]  P. Gavilán,et al.  Comparison of Standardized Reference Evapotranspiration Equations in Southern Spain , 2008 .

[22]  I. Lorite,et al.  Regional calibration of Hargreaves equation for estimating reference ET in a semiarid environment , 2006 .

[23]  Ayse Irmak,et al.  Sensitivity Analyses and Sensitivity Coefficients of Standardized Daily ASCE-Penman-Monteith Equation , 2006 .

[24]  James L. Wright,et al.  New Evapotranspiration Crop Coefficients , 1982 .

[25]  B. S. Piper.  Sensitivity of Penman estimates of evaporation to errors in input data , 1989 .

[26]  R. H. McCuen,et al.  A SENSITIVITY AND ERROR ANALYSIS CF PROCEDURES USED FOR ESTIMATING EVAPORATION , 1974 .

[27]  Nader Katerji,et al.  A Measurement Based Sensitivity Analysis of the Penman-Monteith Actual Evapotranspiration Model for Crops of Different Height and in Contrasting Water Status , 1998 .