Evaluation of NASA satellite- and assimilation model-derived long-term daily temperature data over the continental US

Agricultural research increasingly is expected to provide precise, quantitative information with an explicit geographic coverage. Limited availability of daily meteorological records often constrains efforts to provide such information through use of simulation models, spatial analysis, and related decision support tools. The Prediction Of Worldwide Energy Resources (NASA/POWER) project at the NASA Langley Research Center provides daily data globally for maximum and minimum temperatures and other weather variables on a 18 latitude–longitude grid. The data are assembled from a range of products derived from satellite imagery, ground observations, windsondes, modeling and data assimilation. Daily temperature data from NASA/POWER for 1983 to 2004 for the continental US were compared with data of 855 individual ground stations from the National Weather Service Cooperative Observer Program (COOP). Additionally, a wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) simulation model was used to compare predicted time to anthesis using the two data sources. Comparisons of daily maximum temperatures (Tmax) gave an r 2 -value of 0.88 (P < 0.001) and root-meansquared error (RMSE) of 4.1 8C. For minimum temperature (Tmin), the r 2 -value was 0.88 (P < 0.001) and RMSE, 3.7 8C. Mean values of Tmax, and Tmin from NASA/POWER were, respectively, 2.4 8C cooler and 1.1 8C warmer than the COOP data. Differences in temperature were least during summer months. When data were aggregated over periods of 8 days or more, the RMSE values declined to below 2.7 8C for Tmax and Tmin. Simulations of time to anthesis with the two data sources were also strongly correlated (r 2 = 0.92, P < 0.001, RMSE = 14.5 d). Anthesis dates of winter wheat regions showed better agreement than southern, winter-grown spring wheat regions. The differences between the data sources were associated with differences in elevation, which in large part resulted from NASA/ POWER data being based on mean elevations over a 18 grid cells vs. COOP data corresponding to the elevation of specific stations. Additional sources of variation might include proximity to coastlines and differences in observation time, although these factors were not quantified. Overall, if mountainous and coastal regions are excluded, the NASA/POWER data appeared promising as a source of continuous daily temperature data for the USA for research and management applications concerned with scales appropriate to the 18 coor

[1]  J. Ritchie,et al.  Cereal growth, development and yield , 1998 .

[2]  James W. Jones,et al.  The DSSAT cropping system model , 2003 .

[3]  James W. Jones,et al.  Decision support system for agrotechnology transfer: DSSAT v3 , 1998 .

[4]  Christopher Daly,et al.  Guidelines for assessing the suitability of spatial climate data sets , 2006 .

[5]  Panel on Coastal Meteorology.  Coastal meteorology : a review of the state of the science , 1992 .

[6]  R. Boyles,et al.  Comparison of Collocated Automated (NCECONet) and Manual (COOP) Climate Observations in North Carolina , 2005 .

[7]  A. Court.  TEMPERATURE FREQUENCIES IN THE UNITED STATES , 1951 .

[8]  Claude N. Williams,et al.  A Model to Estimate the Time of Observation Bias Associated with Monthly Mean Maximum, Minimum and Mean Temperatures for the United States , 1986 .

[9]  Pinhas Alpert,et al.  Technical Report Series on Global Modeling and Data Assimilation , 2013 .

[10]  Michael G. Bosilovich,et al.  Documentation and Validation of the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) Data Assimilation System, Version 4 , 2005 .

[11]  R. Pielke,et al.  MICROCLIMATE EXPOSURES OF SURFACE-BASED WEATHER STATIONS , 2005 .

[12]  Jeffrey W. White,et al.  Regression‐Based Evaluation of Ecophysiological Models , 2007 .

[13]  Jeffrey W. White,et al.  Agronomic data: advances in documentation and protocols for exchange and use , 2001 .

[14]  Elizabeth A. Walter-Shea,et al.  The Effectiveness of the ASOS, MMTS, Gill, and CRS Air Temperature Radiation Shields , 2001 .

[15]  Some Concerns when Using Data from the Cooperative Weather Station Networks:A Nebraska Case Study , 2005 .

[16]  Roger A. Pielke,et al.  Microclimate Exposures of Surface-Based Weather Stations: Implications For The Assessment of Long-Term Temperature Trends. , 2005 .

[17]  A. Arnfield.  Two decades of urban climate research: a review of turbulence, exchanges of energy and water, and the urban heat island , 2003 .

[18]  W. J. Shuttleworth,et al.  Research Note: Derivation of temperature lapse rates in semi-arid south-eastern Arizona , 2004 .

[19]  Rezaul Mahmood,et al.  The GeoProfile metadata, exposure of instruments, and measurement bias in climatic record revisited , 2006 .

[20]  S. Pararajasingham,et al.  CROPSIM — WHEAT: A model describing the growth and development of wheat , 1995 .

[21]  J. Ritchie,et al.  Modeling Plant and Soil Systems , 1991 .

[22]  Jeffrey W. White,et al.  Simulation-based analysis of effects of Vrn and Ppd loci on flowering in wheat , 2008 .

[23]  G. Hoogenboom,et al.  Understanding Options for Agricultural Production , 1998, Systems Approaches for Sustainable Agricultural Development.

[24]  A method to infer time of observation at US Cooperative Observer Network stations using model analyses , 2005 .

[25]  J. Neumann.  Latitudinal variation of tropospheric temperature lapse rate , 1955 .

[26]  P. Blanken,et al.  Reply to comment by David E. Parker et al. on: Unresolved issues with the assessment of multidecadal global land surface temperature trends , 2007 .