## Abstract

The two-source energy balance (TSEB) model calculates the energy balance of the soil-canopy-Atmosphere continuum, where transpiration is initially determined by the Priestley-Taylor equation. The TSEB was revised recently using the Penman-Monteith equation to replace the Priestley-Taylor formulation, thus better accounting for the impact of large and varying vapor pressure deficits (VPD) typical of advective, semiarid climates. This study is a comparison of the Priestley-Taylor and Penman-Monteith versions of the TSEB (termed TSEB-PT and TSEB-PM, respectively). Evaporation (E), transpiration (T), and evapotranspiration (ET) calculated by the TSEB-PT and TSEB-PM versions were compared to measurements obtained with microlysimeters, sap flow gauges, and weighing lysimeters, respectively, for fully irrigated cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) at Bushland, Texas. Radiometric surface temperature (T_{R}) was used to calculate E, T, and ET in both TSEB versions in 15 min intervals and summed to intervals coinciding with times of measurements. In addition, a one-time-of-day T_{R} measurement was used (9:45, 11:15, 12:45, 14:15, or 15:45 CST), and E, T, and ET were calculated for the appropriate measurement interval (i.e., daytime, nighttime, and 24 h) using the time scaling methods based on reference ET (TSC_{ET}) and reference temperature (TSC _{TEMP}). Measured average values of E, T, and ET during the study period were 0.94 mm (24 h), 6.9 mm (7:00 to 22:00 CST), and 7.2 mm (24 h), respectively. The TSEB-PT consistently overestimated E and underestimated T, with RMSE/MBE of up to 2.8/1.8 mm and 4.1/-3.9 mm, respectively. In comparison, the TSEB-PM greatly reduced discrepancies between calculations and measurements, with respective RMSE/MBE for E and T of only up to 1.5/0.79 mm and 1.3/±0.76 mm, respectively. For 24 h ET, the TSEB-PT resulted in maximum RMSE/MBE of 3.2/-1.9 mm, and the TSEB-PM had maximum RMSE/MBE of 1.7/0.95 mm. Daytime ET model agreement was very similar for both model versions (RMSE/MBE usually <1.1/<±1.0 mm). However, the TSEB-PT consistently calculated negative nighttime ET of up to -2.0 mm. Summed 15 min calculations generally had better agreement with measurements than did the TSC_{ET} or TSC_{TEMP} methods, and results did not greatly differ for TSC _{ET} or TSC_{TEMP}. Both time scaling methods were not very sensitive to the T_{R} measurement time used, although morning (9:45 CST) T_{R} measurement times did not perform as well as the other times.

Original language | English |
---|---|

Pages (from-to) | 479-498 |

Number of pages | 20 |

Journal | Transactions of the ASABE |

Volume | 57 |

Issue number | 2 |

DOIs | |

State | Published - 1 Jan 2014 |

## Keywords

- Cotton
- Energy balance model
- Evaporation
- Evapotranspiration
- Irrigation
- Remote sensing
- Texas
- Transpiration