Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Comparative Evaluation of Reference Evapotranspiration Estimation Models In New Bhupania Minor Command, Jhajjar, Haryana, India


Affiliations
1 Division of Agricultural Engineering, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India
2 Water Science and Technology, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India
3 Division of Agricultural Physics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India
4 Centre for Environment Science and Climate Resilient Agriculture, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India
5 ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India
 

Accurate quantification of reference crop evapotran-spiration (ETo) plays a significant role in determining crop water requirements in irrigated agriculture. A plethora of methods for the estimation of ETo are available. However, the regional suitability of these methods needs to be assessed given the limited availa-bility of meteorological data. In this study, daily estimates of 11 ETo models were selected and compared with the FAO-Penman–Monteith equation (FAO-PM). The select-ed methods were Blaney–Criddle (BC), Jaisen–Haise (JH), Hargreaves method (HM), McGuinness–Borndne (MB), Chapman (CM), Abtew model (AM), Turc method (TM), FAO-PM equation, Penman equation (PM), Prie-stley–Taylor (PT) and Matt–Shuttleworth (MS). Evalua-tion of these models was carried out during 2016–20 in the New Bhupania Minor Command of the Dulhera dis-tributary, Western Yamuna Canal Command (WYCC), Haryana, India. The selected models were evaluated to find a substitute for the FAO-PM equation based on different statistical indices. It was observed that the PT method performed best and was in line with the FAO-PM equation with correlation coefficient, root mean square error, mean absolute error, Nash–Sutcliffe co-efficient and mean bias error as 0.92, 0.74, 0.48, 0.83, 0.171 respectively. Based on this study and statistical error indices values, the models can be ranked as PT > CM > TM > JH > AM > PM > MS > HM > BC > MB. Thus, we recommend using the PT model for the esti-mation of ETo in the study area with available meteoro-logical parameters for irrigation scheduling.

Keywords

Canal Command, Climatological Data, Comparative Evaluation, Evapotranspiration Estimation Models, Irrigated Agriculture.
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Comparative Evaluation of Reference Evapotranspiration Estimation Models In New Bhupania Minor Command, Jhajjar, Haryana, India

Abstract Views: 285  |  PDF Views: 156

Authors

Venkatesh Gaddikeri
Division of Agricultural Engineering, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India
A. Sarangi
Water Science and Technology, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India
D. K. Singh
Division of Agricultural Engineering, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India
K. K. Bandyopadhyay
Division of Agricultural Physics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India
Bidisha Chakrabarti
Centre for Environment Science and Climate Resilient Agriculture, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India
S. K. Sarkar
ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India., India

Abstract


Accurate quantification of reference crop evapotran-spiration (ETo) plays a significant role in determining crop water requirements in irrigated agriculture. A plethora of methods for the estimation of ETo are available. However, the regional suitability of these methods needs to be assessed given the limited availa-bility of meteorological data. In this study, daily estimates of 11 ETo models were selected and compared with the FAO-Penman–Monteith equation (FAO-PM). The select-ed methods were Blaney–Criddle (BC), Jaisen–Haise (JH), Hargreaves method (HM), McGuinness–Borndne (MB), Chapman (CM), Abtew model (AM), Turc method (TM), FAO-PM equation, Penman equation (PM), Prie-stley–Taylor (PT) and Matt–Shuttleworth (MS). Evalua-tion of these models was carried out during 2016–20 in the New Bhupania Minor Command of the Dulhera dis-tributary, Western Yamuna Canal Command (WYCC), Haryana, India. The selected models were evaluated to find a substitute for the FAO-PM equation based on different statistical indices. It was observed that the PT method performed best and was in line with the FAO-PM equation with correlation coefficient, root mean square error, mean absolute error, Nash–Sutcliffe co-efficient and mean bias error as 0.92, 0.74, 0.48, 0.83, 0.171 respectively. Based on this study and statistical error indices values, the models can be ranked as PT > CM > TM > JH > AM > PM > MS > HM > BC > MB. Thus, we recommend using the PT model for the esti-mation of ETo in the study area with available meteoro-logical parameters for irrigation scheduling.

Keywords


Canal Command, Climatological Data, Comparative Evaluation, Evapotranspiration Estimation Models, Irrigated Agriculture.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv124%2Fi10%2F1181-1187