Evapotranspiration Explained

Evapotranspiration (ET) refers to the combined processes which move water from the Earth's surface (open water and ice surfaces, bare soil and vegetation) into the atmosphere.[1] It covers both water evaporation (movement of water to the air directly from soil, canopies, and water bodies) and transpiration (evaporation that occurs through the stomata, or openings, in plant leaves). Evapotranspiration is an important part of the local water cycle and climate, and measurement of it plays a key role in agricultural irrigation and water resource management.[2]

Definition

Evapotranspiration is defined as: "The combined processes through which water is transferred to the atmosphere from open water and ice surfaces, bare soil and vegetation that make up the Earth’s surface."

Evapotranspiration is a combination of evaporation and transpiration, measured in order to better understand crop water requirements, irrigation scheduling,[3] and watershed management.[4] The two key components of evapotranspiration are:

Evapotranspiration is typically measured in millimeters of water (i.e. volume of water moved per unit area of the Earth's surface) in a set unit of time.[5] Globally, it is estimated that on average between three-fifths and three-quarters of land precipitation is returned to the atmosphere via evapotranspiration.[6] [7] [8]

Evapotranspiration does not, in general, account for other mechanisms which are involved in returning water to the atmosphere, though some of these, such as snow and ice sublimation in regions of high elevation or high latitude, can make a large contribution to atmospheric moisture even under standard conditions.

Influencing factors

See also: Water cycle.

Primary factors

Levels of evapotranspiration in a given area are primarily controlled by three factors: Firstly, the amount of water present. Secondly, the amount of energy present in the air and soil (e.g. heat, measured by the global surface temperature); and thirdly the ability of the atmosphere to take up water (humidity).

Regarding the second factor (energy and heat): climate change has increased global temperatures (see instrumental temperature record). This global warming has increased evapotranspiration over land.[9] The increased evapotranspiration is one of the effects of climate change on the water cycle.

Secondary factors

Vegetation type

Vegetation type impacts levels of evapotranspiration.[10] For example, herbaceous plants generally transpire less than woody plants, because they usually have less extensive foliage. Also, plants with deep reaching roots can transpire water more constantly, because those roots can pull more water into the plant and leaves. Another example is that conifer forests tend to have higher rates of evapotranspiration than deciduous broadleaf forests, particularly in the dormant winter and early spring seasons, because they are evergreen.[11]

Vegetation coverage

Transpiration is a larger component of evapotranspiration (relative to evaporation) in vegetation-abundant areas.[12] As a result, denser vegetation, like forests, may increase evapotranspiration and reduce water yield.

Two exceptions to this are cloud forests and rainforests. In cloud forests, trees collect the liquid water in fog or low clouds onto their surface, which eventually drips down to the ground. These trees still contribute to evapotranspiration, but often collect more water than they evaporate or transpire.[13] [14] In rainforests, water yield is increased (compared to cleared, unforested land in the same climatic zone) as evapotranspiration increases humidity within the forest (a portion of which condenses and returns quickly as precipitation experienced at ground level as rain). The density of the vegetation blocks sunlight and reduces temperatures at ground level (thereby reducing losses due to surface evaporation), and reduces wind speeds (thereby reducing the loss of airborne moisture). The combined effect results in increased surface stream flows and a higher ground water table whilst the rainforest is preserved. Clearing of rainforests frequently leads to desertification as ground level temperatures and wind speeds increase, vegetation cover is lost or intentionally destroyed by clearing and burning, soil moisture is reduced by wind, and soils are easily eroded by high wind and rainfall events.[15] [16]

Soil and irrigation

In areas that are not irrigated, actual evapotranspiration is usually no greater than precipitation, with some buffer and variations in time depending on the soil's ability to hold water. It will usually be less because some water will be lost due to percolation or surface runoff. An exception is areas with high water tables, where capillary action can cause water from the groundwater to rise through the soil matrix back to the surface. If potential evapotranspiration is greater than the actual precipitation, then soil will dry out until conditions stabilize, unless irrigation is used.

Measurements

Direct measurement

See main article: Lysimeter. Evapotranspiration can be measured directly with a weighing or pan lysimeter. A lysimeter continuously measures the weight of a plant and associated soil, and any water added by precipitation or irrigation. The change in storage of water in the soil is then modeled by measuring the change in weight. When used properly, this allows for precise measurement of evapotranspiration over small areas.

Indirect estimation

Because atmospheric vapor flux is difficult or time-consuming to measure directly, evapotranspiration is typically estimated by one of several different methods that do not rely on direct measurement.

Catchment water balance

Evapotranspiration may be estimated by evaluating the water balance equation for a given area:. The water balance equation relates the change in water stored within the basin (S) to its input and outputs:

\DeltaS=P-ET-Q-D

In the equation, the change in water stored within the basin (ΔS) is related to precipitation (P) (water going into the basin), and evapotranspiration (ET), streamflow (Q), and groundwater recharge (D) (water leaving the basin). By rearranging the equation, ET can be estimated if values for the other variables are known:

ET=P-\DeltaS-Q-D

Energy balance

A second methodology for estimation is by calculating the energy balance.

λE=Rn-G-H

where λE is the energy needed to change the phase of water from liquid to gas, Rn is the net radiation, G is the soil heat flux and H is the sensible heat flux. Using instruments like a scintillometer, soil heat flux plates or radiation meters, the components of the energy balance can be calculated and the energy available for actual evapotranspiration can be solved.

The SEBAL and METRIC algorithms solve for the energy balance at the Earth's surface using satellite imagery. This allows for both actual and potential evapotranspiration to be calculated on a pixel-by-pixel basis. Evapotranspiration is a key indicator for water management and irrigation performance. SEBAL and METRIC can map these key indicators in time and space, for days, weeks or years.[17]

Estimation from meteorological data

Given meteorological data like wind, temperature, and humidity, reference ET can be calculated. The most general and widely used equation for calculating reference ET is the Penman equation. The Penman–Monteith variation is recommended by the Food and Agriculture Organization[18] and the American Society of Civil Engineers.[19] The simpler Blaney–Criddle equation was popular in the Western United States for many years but it is not as accurate in wet regions with higher humidity. Other equations for estimating evapotranspiration from meteorological data include the Makkink equation, which is simple but must be calibrated to a specific location, and the Hargreaves equations.

To convert the reference evapotranspiration to the actual crop evapotranspiration, a crop coefficient and a stress coefficient must be used. Crop coefficients, as used in many hydrological models, usually change over the year because crops are seasonal and, in general, plant behaviour varies over the year: perennial plants mature over multiple seasons, while annuals do not survive more than a few, so stress responses can significantly depend upon many aspects of plant type and condition.

List of remote sensing based evapotranspiration models

See also

External links

Notes and References

  1. IPCC, 2022: Annex II: Glossary [Möller, V., R. van Diemen, J.B.R. Matthews, C. Méndez, S. Semenov, J.S. Fuglestvedt, A. Reisinger (eds.)]. In: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Pörtner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Löschke, V. Möller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 2897–2930, doi:10.1017/9781009325844.029.
  2. Web site: Evapotranspiration - an overview ScienceDirect Topics . 2022-05-02 . www.sciencedirect.com.
  3. Book: Goyal. Megh R.. Evapotranspiration: Principles and Applications for Water Management. Harmsen. Eric W.. 2013-09-26. CRC Press. 978-1-926895-58-1. xxi. en.
  4. Vörösmarty. C. J.. Federer. C. A.. Schloss. A. L.. 1998-06-25. Potential evaporation functions compared on US watersheds: Possible implications for global-scale water balance and terrestrial ecosystem modeling. Journal of Hydrology. en. 207. 3. 147–169. 10.1016/S0022-1694(98)00109-7. 1998JHyd..207..147V. 0022-1694.
  5. Book: Allen, Rick G.. Crop Evapotranspiration: Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 1998. 978-92-5-104219-9. en.
  6. Jung. Martin. Reichstein. Markus. Ciais. Philippe. Seneviratne. Sonia I.. Sheffield. Justin. Goulden. Michael L.. Bonan. Gordon. Cescatti. Alessandro. Chen. Jiquan. de Jeu. Richard. Dolman. A. Johannes. 2010-10-21. Recent decline in the global land evapotranspiration trend due to limited moisture supply. Nature. en. 467. 7318. 951–954. 10.1038/nature09396. 20935626. 2010Natur.467..951J. 4334266. 1476-4687.
  7. Oki. Taikan. Kanae. Shinjiro. 2006-08-25. Global Hydrological Cycles and World Water Resources. Science. 313. 5790. EN. 1068–1072. 10.1126/science.1128845. 16931749. 2006Sci...313.1068O. 39993634.
  8. Book: Alexandris, Stavros. Evapotranspiration: An Overview. 2013-04-30. BoD – Books on Demand. 978-953-51-1115-3. en.
  9. Douville, H., K. Raghavan, J. Renwick, R.P. Allan, P.A. Arias, M. Barlow, R. Cerezo-Mota, A. Cherchi, T.Y. Gan, J. Gergis, D.  Jiang, A.  Khan, W.  Pokam Mba, D.  Rosenfeld, J. Tierney, and O.  Zolina, 2021: Chapter 8: Water Cycle Changes. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I  to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 1055–1210, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.010.
  10. Giardina . Francesco . Gentine . Pierre . Konings . Alexandra G. . Seneviratne . Sonia I. . Stocker . Benjamin D. . Diagnosing evapotranspiration responses to water deficit across biomes using deep learning . New Phytologist . 25 August 2023 . 240 . 3 . 968–983 . 10.1111/nph.19197 . 37621238 . 261120782 . free . 20.500.11850/628261 . free .
  11. Swank. Wayne T.. Douglass. James E.. 1974-09-06. Streamflow Greatly Reduced by Converting Deciduous Hardwood Stands to Pine. Science. en. 185. 4154. 857–859. 10.1126/science.185.4154.857. 0036-8075. 17833698. 1974Sci...185..857S. 42654218. 2020-01-07. 2012-12-24. https://web.archive.org/web/20121224234142/http://coweeta.uga.edu/publications/452.pdf. dead.
  12. Jasechko . Scott . Sharp . Zachary D. . Gibson . John J. . Birks . S. Jean . Yi . Yi . Fawcett . Peter J. . 3 April 2013 . Terrestrial water fluxes dominated by transpiration . Nature . 496 . 7445 . 347–50 . 2013Natur.496..347J . 10.1038/nature11983 . 23552893 . 4371468.
  13. Holder . Curtis D . 2004-03-22 . Rainfall interception and fog precipitation in a tropical montane cloud forest of Guatemala . Forest Ecology and Management . en . 190 . 2 . 373–384 . 10.1016/j.foreco.2003.11.004 . 0378-1127.
  14. Web site: Cloud Forest . 2022-05-02 . Community Cloud Forest Conservation . en-US.
  15. Web site: How plants play a vital role for rainfall within the tropical rainforest Britannica . 2022-05-02 . www.britannica.com . en.
  16. Web site: Sheil . Douglas . 2009-04-01 . How Forests Attract Rain: An Examination of a New Hypothesis . 2022-05-02 . BioScience.
  17. Web site: SEBAL_ WaterWatch. live. https://web.archive.org/web/20110713133722/http://www.waterwatch.nl/tools0/sebal.html. 2011-07-13.
  18. Book: Allen, R.G.. Crop Evapotranspiration: Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements. Pereira, L.S.. Raes, D.. Smith, M.. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 1998. 978-92-5-104219-9. FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. Rome, Italy. 2011-06-08. https://web.archive.org/web/20110515113038/http://www.fao.org/docrep/X0490E/x0490e00.HTM. 2011-05-15. live.
  19. Rojas. Jose P.. Sheffield. Ronald E.. 2013. Evaluation of Daily Reference Evapotranspiration Methods as Compared with the ASCE-EWRI Penman-Monteith Equation Using Limited Weather Data in Northeast Louisiana. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering. 139. 4. 285–292. 10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000523. 0733-9437.
  20. Anderson. M. C.. Kustas. W. P.. Norman. J. M.. Hain. C. R.. Mecikalski. J. R.. Schultz. L.. González-Dugo. M. P.. Cammalleri. C.. d'Urso. G.. Pimstein. A.. Gao. F.. 2011-01-21. Mapping daily evapotranspiration at field to continental scales using geostationary and polar orbiting satellite imagery. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. en. 15. 1. 223–239. 10.5194/hess-15-223-2011. 1607-7938. 2011HESS...15..223A. free. 10447/53094. free.
  21. Dhungel. Ramesh. Aiken. Robert. Colaizzi. Paul D.. Lin. Xiaomao. O'Brien. Dan. Baumhardt. R. Louis. Brauer. David K.. Marek. Gary W.. 2019-07-15. Evaluation of uncalibrated energy balance model (BAITSSS) for estimating evapotranspiration in a semiarid, advective climate. Hydrological Processes. en. 33. 15. 2110–2130. 10.1002/hyp.13458. 0885-6087. 2019HyPr...33.2110D. 146551438.
  22. Dhungel. Ramesh. Allen. Richard G.. Trezza. Ricardo. Robison. Clarence W.. 2016. Evapotranspiration between satellite overpasses: methodology and case study in agricultural dominant semi-arid areas. Meteorological Applications. en. 23. 4. 714–730. 10.1002/met.1596. 1469-8080. 2016MeApp..23..714D. free.
  23. Allen Richard G.. Tasumi Masahiro. Trezza Ricardo. 2007-08-01. Satellite-Based Energy Balance for Mapping Evapotranspiration with Internalized Calibration (METRIC)—Model. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering. 133. 4. 380–394. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2007)133:4(380).
  24. Abtew W. Evapotranspiration Measurements and Modeling for Three Wetland Systems in South Florida. J. Am. Water Resour. Assn. 1996;32:465–473.
  25. Bastiaanssen. W. G. M.. Menenti. M.. Feddes. R. A.. Holtslag. A. A. M.. 1998-12-01. A remote sensing surface energy balance algorithm for land (SEBAL). 1. Formulation. Journal of Hydrology. 212-213. 198–212. 10.1016/S0022-1694(98)00253-4. 0022-1694. 1998JHyd..212..198B.
  26. Su. Z.. 2002. The Surface Energy Balance System (SEBS) for estimation of turbulent heat fluxes. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. 6. 1. 85–100. 10.5194/hess-6-85-2002. 2002HESS....6...85S. 1607-7938. free.
  27. Senay. Gabriel B.. Bohms. Stefanie. Singh. Ramesh K.. Gowda. Prasanna H.. Velpuri. Naga M.. Alemu. Henok. Verdin. James P.. 2013-05-13. Operational Evapotranspiration Mapping Using Remote Sensing and Weather Datasets: A New Parameterization for the SSEB Approach. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 49. 3. 577–591. 10.1111/jawr.12057. 1093-474X. 2013JAWRA..49..577S. free.
  28. FAO. 2023. Remote sensing determination of evapotranspiration – Algorithms, strengths, weaknesses, uncertainty and best fit-for-purpose. Cairo. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc8150en
  29. Fisher J.B., Tu K.P. and Baldocchi D.D. 2008. Global estimates of the land–atmosphere water flux based on monthly AVHRR and ISLSCP-II data, validated at 16 FLUXNET sites. Remote sensing Environ., 112: 901–919
  30. Hu G. and Jia L. 2015. Monitoring of evapotranspiration in a semi-arid inland river basin by combining microwave and optical remote sensing observations. Remote sensing, 7: 3056-3087; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs70303056
  31. FAO. 2023. Remote sensing determination of evapotranspiration – Algorithms, strengths, weaknesses, uncertainty and best fit-for- purpose. Cairo. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc8150en
  32. Wu B., Zhu W., Yan N., Xing Q., Xu J., Ma Z. and Wang L. 2020. Regional actual evapotranspiration estimation with land and meteorological variables derived from multi-source satellite data. Remote sensing, 12, 332; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12020332

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Evapotranspiration".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.