International Journal of Plant Protection

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Evaluation Of Evaporation Measuring Methods For Reference Evapotranspiration within Greenhouse


Affiliations
1 Institute of Agriculture, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Kulmulur, Trichy (T.N.), India
2 Department of Basic Engineering and Applied Sciences, Agriculture Engineering College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Kumulur, Trichy (T.N.), India
3 Water Technology Centre, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore (T.N.), India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Alternative methods for estimating reference evapotranspiration (ETo) within greenhouses are explored due to the large area occupied by a Class A pan. Based on the locations, the evapotranspiration difference between inside and outside greenhouse varies. Research results about what pan co-efficient (Kp) should be utilized inside the greenhouse are not conclusive. Therefore the main objective of the work was to compare ETo calculated by various methods within and outside a greenhouse. A Class A pan (CAPi), a reduced pan (RPi60cmØ ) and a reduced pan (RPi20cmØ ) were installed inside a greenhouse, and another Class A pan (CAPo) was installed outside. ETo estimates, obtained by CAPi, RPi60cmØ and RPi20cmØ were 54 per cent, 57 per cent and 59 per cent of those estimated by CAPo, respectively. A simple linear regression showed positive coefficients R = 0.76 for the CAPox CAPi , R = 0.96 for the CAPi and the RPi60cmØ , R = 0.98 for the CAPi and the RPi20cm Ø . The study concluded that it is possible to use reduced pans to estimate the ETo inside the greenhouse and replacement of reduced pan would increase the space available for cultivation in the greenhouse.

Keywords

Class a Pan, Reduced Pan20cm Ø, Reduced Pan60cm Ø , Evapotranspiration, Linear Regression.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Altenhofen, J.A. (1985).Modified atmometer for on farm evapotranspiration determination. In: National Conference On Advances In Evapotranspiration, Chicago. Anais. Chicago: ASAE, 177-184.

  • Andriolo, J.L. (1999).Fisiologia das culturasprotegidas. Santa Maria: UFSM.142.

  • Blanco, F.F. and Folegatti, M.V. (2003).Evapotranspiration and crop coefficient of cucumber in greenhouse.Revista Brasileira de EngenhariaAgrícola e Ambiental, 7(2): 285– 291.

  • Braga, M.B. and Klar, A.E. (2000).Plastic tunnel orientation influence on evaporation and reference evapotranspiration. Irriga, 5 : 222-228

  • Çetin, Ö.,Yildirim, O., Uygan, D. and Boyaci, H. (2002). Irrigation scheduling of drip-irrigated tomatoes using class A pan evaporation. Turkish J. Agric. & Forestry, 26(4):171–178.

  • Doorenbos, J. and Pruitt, W.O. (1976).Guidelines for predicting crop water requirements.Roma: FAO193.

  • Evaluation of evaporation-measuring equipments for estimating evapotranspiration within a greenhouse. In: CongressoBrasileiro De Agrometeorologia, 10, Piracicaba, Anais. Piracicaba: ESALQ228-230.

  • Farias, J.R.B., Bergamaschi, H. and Martins, S.R. (1994). Evapotranspiration inside plastic greenhouses. Revista Brasileira de Agrometeorologia, Santa Maria, 2: 17-22.

  • Guttormsen, G. (1974).Effects of ischolar_main medium and watering on transpiration, growth and development of glasshouse crops: II. The relationship between evaporation pan measurements and transpiration in glasshouse crops.Plant & Soil., 40 : 461-478.

  • Kelsey A. Czyzyk, Shayne T. Bement, William F. Dawson and Khanjan Mehta (2014).Quantifying Water Savings with Greenhouse Farming. Global Humanitarian Technology Conference Social Entrepreneurship (HESE) students in Cameroon and Kenya.78-1-4799-7193-0/14

  • Marouelli, W.A., Silva, W.L. de C. and Silva, H.R. (1996). Irrigation Management in Vegetables.5.ed. Brasília: EMBRAPA, SPI72.

  • Martins, G., Castellane, P.D. and Volpe, C.A. (1994).Influence of greenhouse on climate and rainy summer season. Horticultura Brasileira., 12: 131-135. Medeiros, J.F. de; Pereira, F.A. de C.; Folegatti, M.V.; Pereira, A.R.; Villa Nova, N.A. 1997.

  • Medeiros, J.F. de, Pereira, F.A. de C.; Folegatti, M.V., Pereira, A.R. and Villa Nova, N.A. (1997).Comparação entre a evaporação em tanque Classe A padrão e em mini tanque, instalados em estufa e estação meteorológica. In: Congresso Brasileiro De Agrometeorologia, 10., Piracicaba, 1997. Anais. Piracicaba: ESALQ, p.228-230.

  • Menezes, J.R., F.O.G., Martins, S.R., Duarte, G.B. and Fortes, D.F. (1999). Estimation of evapotranspiration in protected environment by using different evaporimeters. In: Congresso Brasileiro De Agrometeorologia, 11.ReuniãoLatin American Agrometeorology, 2, Florianópolis,.Anais.Florianópolis: SociedadeBrasileira de Agrometeorologia370.

  • Montero, J.I., Castilla, N., Gutierrez de Ravé, E. and Bretones, F. (1985).Climate under plastic in the Almeria. Acta Horticulturae, 170: 227-234.

  • Oliveira, M.R.V. (1995).Employment of greenhouses in Brazil: advantages and disadvantages. Brazilian Agricultural Res., 30 : 1049-1060.

  • Prados, N.C.(1986).Contribución al estudio de los cultivos enarenados en Almeria: necesidades hídricas y extracción del nutrientes del cultivo de tomate de crecimento indeterminado en abrigo de polietileno. Almeria: Caja Rural Provincial, 1986. 195p. Tesis Doctoral

  • Rosenberg, N.J., Mckenney, M.S. and Martin, P. (1989). Evapotranspiration in a greenhouse-warmed world: a review and a simulation. Agric. & Forest Meteorol., 47: 303-320.

  • Sentelhas, P.C. (2001).Agrometeorology applied to irrigation. In: Miranda, J.H., Pires, R.C. de M. Irrigação. Piracicaba: FUNEP, 63-120.

  • Xu Junzeng, Peng Shizhang, Luo Yufeng and Jiao Xiyun (2008).Tomato and cowpea crop evapotranspiration in an unheated greenhouse. Water Sci. & Engg., 1(2): 112-120.


Abstract Views: 552

PDF Views: 0




  • Evaluation Of Evaporation Measuring Methods For Reference Evapotranspiration within Greenhouse

Abstract Views: 552  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

E. Sujitha
Institute of Agriculture, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Kulmulur, Trichy (T.N.), India
K. Shanmugasundaram
Department of Basic Engineering and Applied Sciences, Agriculture Engineering College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Kumulur, Trichy (T.N.), India
G. Thiyagarajan
Water Technology Centre, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore (T.N.), India

Abstract


Alternative methods for estimating reference evapotranspiration (ETo) within greenhouses are explored due to the large area occupied by a Class A pan. Based on the locations, the evapotranspiration difference between inside and outside greenhouse varies. Research results about what pan co-efficient (Kp) should be utilized inside the greenhouse are not conclusive. Therefore the main objective of the work was to compare ETo calculated by various methods within and outside a greenhouse. A Class A pan (CAPi), a reduced pan (RPi60cmØ ) and a reduced pan (RPi20cmØ ) were installed inside a greenhouse, and another Class A pan (CAPo) was installed outside. ETo estimates, obtained by CAPi, RPi60cmØ and RPi20cmØ were 54 per cent, 57 per cent and 59 per cent of those estimated by CAPo, respectively. A simple linear regression showed positive coefficients R = 0.76 for the CAPox CAPi , R = 0.96 for the CAPi and the RPi60cmØ , R = 0.98 for the CAPi and the RPi20cm Ø . The study concluded that it is possible to use reduced pans to estimate the ETo inside the greenhouse and replacement of reduced pan would increase the space available for cultivation in the greenhouse.

Keywords


Class a Pan, Reduced Pan20cm Ø, Reduced Pan60cm Ø , Evapotranspiration, Linear Regression.

References