Evaluation of soil and vegetation heat flux predictions using a simple two-source model with radiometric temperatures for partial canopy cover

A two-source model developed to use radiometric temperature observations for predicting component surface energy fluxes from soil and vegetation was evaluated with data from a row crop (cotton). The total or combined heat fluxes from the soil and vegetation agreed to within 20% of the observed value...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Agricultural and forest meteorology 1999-04, Vol.94 (1), p.13-29
Hauptverfasser: Kustas, William P, Norman, John M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 29
container_issue 1
container_start_page 13
container_title Agricultural and forest meteorology
container_volume 94
creator Kustas, William P
Norman, John M
description A two-source model developed to use radiometric temperature observations for predicting component surface energy fluxes from soil and vegetation was evaluated with data from a row crop (cotton). The total or combined heat fluxes from the soil and vegetation agreed to within 20% of the observed values, on average. Component heat flux predictions from the soil and vegetation indicated that soil evaporation was generally higher than canopy transpiration. This result contradicts an earlier study which showed that soil evaporation was ∼1/3 of canopy transpiration rates with a significant source of sensible heat from the soil being advected to the canopy ( Kustas, 1990). Moreover, the modeled derived canopy temperatures were ∼6 K higher and soil temperatures were ∼4 K lower than the radiometric temperature observations. In order to obtain more physically realistic soil and vegetation component heat fluxes and better agreement between the predicted and observed soil and canopy temperatures, two model parameterizations required modification. One adjustment was to the magnitude of the Priestley–Taylor coefficient α PT used in estimating canopy transpiration. The magnitude of α PT was increased by ≈50% from its `universal constant' α PT ∼ 1.3 to α PT ∼ 2. The other modification was to the free convective velocity, U CV, defined as constant in the original formulation for estimating soil resistance to sensible heat flux transfer, R S. The new formulation is based on the recent experimental results from Kondo and Ishida (1997)who found that U CV ∝ Δ T 1/3 where Δ T is the surface–air temperature difference. Both of these modifications are shown to be supported by observations from the literature and therefore are not considered merely model `tuning'. Furthermore, component heat fluxes predicted by the model using canopy and soil radiometric temperature observations support the higher α PT value and new free convective formulation for estimating R S. Two other changes to model algorithms are described which are relevant to all dual-source modeling schemes. One is replacing the commonly used Beer's law type expression for estimating the divergence of net radiation in partial canopy covered surfaces with a more physically-based algorithm. The other is a simple method to address the effects of clumped vegetation (common in row crops and sparse canopies) on radiation divergence and wind speed inside the canopy layer.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/S0168-1923(99)00005-2
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_18099723</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0168192399000052</els_id><sourcerecordid>18099723</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-836f71f1c5c589b3bcdd217c3bd54a8de0eebf7b30ea6f1c8c1d7fef5a88ab8b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1u1DAQgCMEEkvLI1TyASE4BGwnWdsnhKryI63g0HK2JvZ4a-TEwXa27Uv0mck2FRzrw1ia-WZszVdVZ4x-YJRtP14uQdZM8eadUu_pcrqaP6s2TIqm5rylz6vNP-Rl9Srn35QyLoTaVPcXBwgzFB9HEh3J0QcCoyUH3GNZ09cIhbgw35IpofXmmMxkzn7cEyDZD1NAUm5ineOcDJIhWgzkxpdrksD6OGBJ3pCCw4QJypwwExcTmSAVD4EYGON0R0w8YDqtXjgIGV8_3ifVry8XV-ff6t3Pr9_PP-9q03JaatlsnWCOmc50UvVNb6zlTJimt10L0iJF7J3oG4qwXTBpmBUOXQdSQi_75qR6u86dUvwzYy568NlgCDBinLNmkiolePM02HZUMs4XsFtBk2LOCZ2ekh8g3WlG9VGTftCkjw60UvpBkz72vXl8ALKB4BKMxuf_zYq1StAFO1sxB1HDPi3Ijx1TSlHaiK1a6p_WOi5bO3hMOhuPo1mEJTRF2-if-Mhfbya0OQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>14508122</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of soil and vegetation heat flux predictions using a simple two-source model with radiometric temperatures for partial canopy cover</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Kustas, William P ; Norman, John M</creator><creatorcontrib>Kustas, William P ; Norman, John M</creatorcontrib><description>A two-source model developed to use radiometric temperature observations for predicting component surface energy fluxes from soil and vegetation was evaluated with data from a row crop (cotton). The total or combined heat fluxes from the soil and vegetation agreed to within 20% of the observed values, on average. Component heat flux predictions from the soil and vegetation indicated that soil evaporation was generally higher than canopy transpiration. This result contradicts an earlier study which showed that soil evaporation was ∼1/3 of canopy transpiration rates with a significant source of sensible heat from the soil being advected to the canopy ( Kustas, 1990). Moreover, the modeled derived canopy temperatures were ∼6 K higher and soil temperatures were ∼4 K lower than the radiometric temperature observations. In order to obtain more physically realistic soil and vegetation component heat fluxes and better agreement between the predicted and observed soil and canopy temperatures, two model parameterizations required modification. One adjustment was to the magnitude of the Priestley–Taylor coefficient α PT used in estimating canopy transpiration. The magnitude of α PT was increased by ≈50% from its `universal constant' α PT ∼ 1.3 to α PT ∼ 2. The other modification was to the free convective velocity, U CV, defined as constant in the original formulation for estimating soil resistance to sensible heat flux transfer, R S. The new formulation is based on the recent experimental results from Kondo and Ishida (1997)who found that U CV ∝ Δ T 1/3 where Δ T is the surface–air temperature difference. Both of these modifications are shown to be supported by observations from the literature and therefore are not considered merely model `tuning'. Furthermore, component heat fluxes predicted by the model using canopy and soil radiometric temperature observations support the higher α PT value and new free convective formulation for estimating R S. Two other changes to model algorithms are described which are relevant to all dual-source modeling schemes. One is replacing the commonly used Beer's law type expression for estimating the divergence of net radiation in partial canopy covered surfaces with a more physically-based algorithm. The other is a simple method to address the effects of clumped vegetation (common in row crops and sparse canopies) on radiation divergence and wind speed inside the canopy layer.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0168-1923</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2240</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0168-1923(99)00005-2</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AFMEEB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Agricultural and forest climatology and meteorology. Irrigation. Drainage ; Agricultural and forest meteorology ; Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions ; Biological and medical sciences ; CANOPY ; Climatic models of plant production ; COUVERT ; COUVERTURE VEGETALE ; CUBIERTA DE COPAS ; CUBIERTA VEGETAL ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General agronomy. Plant production ; Generalities. Techniques. Climatology. Meteorology. Climatic models of plant production ; INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGIQUE ; INSTRUMENTOS METEOROLOGICOS ; METEOROLOGICAL INSTRUMENTS ; MODELE ; MODELOS ; PLANT COVER ; Radiation balance ; Remote sensing ; Row crop ; Surface energy balance ; TEMPERATURA ; TEMPERATURE</subject><ispartof>Agricultural and forest meteorology, 1999-04, Vol.94 (1), p.13-29</ispartof><rights>1999 Elsevier Science B.V.</rights><rights>1999 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-836f71f1c5c589b3bcdd217c3bd54a8de0eebf7b30ea6f1c8c1d7fef5a88ab8b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-836f71f1c5c589b3bcdd217c3bd54a8de0eebf7b30ea6f1c8c1d7fef5a88ab8b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168192399000052$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=1914970$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kustas, William P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Norman, John M</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of soil and vegetation heat flux predictions using a simple two-source model with radiometric temperatures for partial canopy cover</title><title>Agricultural and forest meteorology</title><description>A two-source model developed to use radiometric temperature observations for predicting component surface energy fluxes from soil and vegetation was evaluated with data from a row crop (cotton). The total or combined heat fluxes from the soil and vegetation agreed to within 20% of the observed values, on average. Component heat flux predictions from the soil and vegetation indicated that soil evaporation was generally higher than canopy transpiration. This result contradicts an earlier study which showed that soil evaporation was ∼1/3 of canopy transpiration rates with a significant source of sensible heat from the soil being advected to the canopy ( Kustas, 1990). Moreover, the modeled derived canopy temperatures were ∼6 K higher and soil temperatures were ∼4 K lower than the radiometric temperature observations. In order to obtain more physically realistic soil and vegetation component heat fluxes and better agreement between the predicted and observed soil and canopy temperatures, two model parameterizations required modification. One adjustment was to the magnitude of the Priestley–Taylor coefficient α PT used in estimating canopy transpiration. The magnitude of α PT was increased by ≈50% from its `universal constant' α PT ∼ 1.3 to α PT ∼ 2. The other modification was to the free convective velocity, U CV, defined as constant in the original formulation for estimating soil resistance to sensible heat flux transfer, R S. The new formulation is based on the recent experimental results from Kondo and Ishida (1997)who found that U CV ∝ Δ T 1/3 where Δ T is the surface–air temperature difference. Both of these modifications are shown to be supported by observations from the literature and therefore are not considered merely model `tuning'. Furthermore, component heat fluxes predicted by the model using canopy and soil radiometric temperature observations support the higher α PT value and new free convective formulation for estimating R S. Two other changes to model algorithms are described which are relevant to all dual-source modeling schemes. One is replacing the commonly used Beer's law type expression for estimating the divergence of net radiation in partial canopy covered surfaces with a more physically-based algorithm. The other is a simple method to address the effects of clumped vegetation (common in row crops and sparse canopies) on radiation divergence and wind speed inside the canopy layer.</description><subject>Agricultural and forest climatology and meteorology. Irrigation. Drainage</subject><subject>Agricultural and forest meteorology</subject><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>CANOPY</subject><subject>Climatic models of plant production</subject><subject>COUVERT</subject><subject>COUVERTURE VEGETALE</subject><subject>CUBIERTA DE COPAS</subject><subject>CUBIERTA VEGETAL</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General agronomy. Plant production</subject><subject>Generalities. Techniques. Climatology. Meteorology. Climatic models of plant production</subject><subject>INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGIQUE</subject><subject>INSTRUMENTOS METEOROLOGICOS</subject><subject>METEOROLOGICAL INSTRUMENTS</subject><subject>MODELE</subject><subject>MODELOS</subject><subject>PLANT COVER</subject><subject>Radiation balance</subject><subject>Remote sensing</subject><subject>Row crop</subject><subject>Surface energy balance</subject><subject>TEMPERATURA</subject><subject>TEMPERATURE</subject><issn>0168-1923</issn><issn>1873-2240</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1999</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkc1u1DAQgCMEEkvLI1TyASE4BGwnWdsnhKryI63g0HK2JvZ4a-TEwXa27Uv0mck2FRzrw1ia-WZszVdVZ4x-YJRtP14uQdZM8eadUu_pcrqaP6s2TIqm5rylz6vNP-Rl9Srn35QyLoTaVPcXBwgzFB9HEh3J0QcCoyUH3GNZ09cIhbgw35IpofXmmMxkzn7cEyDZD1NAUm5ineOcDJIhWgzkxpdrksD6OGBJ3pCCw4QJypwwExcTmSAVD4EYGON0R0w8YDqtXjgIGV8_3ifVry8XV-ff6t3Pr9_PP-9q03JaatlsnWCOmc50UvVNb6zlTJimt10L0iJF7J3oG4qwXTBpmBUOXQdSQi_75qR6u86dUvwzYy568NlgCDBinLNmkiolePM02HZUMs4XsFtBk2LOCZ2ekh8g3WlG9VGTftCkjw60UvpBkz72vXl8ALKB4BKMxuf_zYq1StAFO1sxB1HDPi3Ijx1TSlHaiK1a6p_WOi5bO3hMOhuPo1mEJTRF2-if-Mhfbya0OQ</recordid><startdate>19990401</startdate><enddate>19990401</enddate><creator>Kustas, William P</creator><creator>Norman, John M</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>KL.</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19990401</creationdate><title>Evaluation of soil and vegetation heat flux predictions using a simple two-source model with radiometric temperatures for partial canopy cover</title><author>Kustas, William P ; Norman, John M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-836f71f1c5c589b3bcdd217c3bd54a8de0eebf7b30ea6f1c8c1d7fef5a88ab8b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1999</creationdate><topic>Agricultural and forest climatology and meteorology. Irrigation. Drainage</topic><topic>Agricultural and forest meteorology</topic><topic>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>CANOPY</topic><topic>Climatic models of plant production</topic><topic>COUVERT</topic><topic>COUVERTURE VEGETALE</topic><topic>CUBIERTA DE COPAS</topic><topic>CUBIERTA VEGETAL</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General agronomy. Plant production</topic><topic>Generalities. Techniques. Climatology. Meteorology. Climatic models of plant production</topic><topic>INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGIQUE</topic><topic>INSTRUMENTOS METEOROLOGICOS</topic><topic>METEOROLOGICAL INSTRUMENTS</topic><topic>MODELE</topic><topic>MODELOS</topic><topic>PLANT COVER</topic><topic>Radiation balance</topic><topic>Remote sensing</topic><topic>Row crop</topic><topic>Surface energy balance</topic><topic>TEMPERATURA</topic><topic>TEMPERATURE</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kustas, William P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Norman, John M</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><jtitle>Agricultural and forest meteorology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kustas, William P</au><au>Norman, John M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of soil and vegetation heat flux predictions using a simple two-source model with radiometric temperatures for partial canopy cover</atitle><jtitle>Agricultural and forest meteorology</jtitle><date>1999-04-01</date><risdate>1999</risdate><volume>94</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>13</spage><epage>29</epage><pages>13-29</pages><issn>0168-1923</issn><eissn>1873-2240</eissn><coden>AFMEEB</coden><abstract>A two-source model developed to use radiometric temperature observations for predicting component surface energy fluxes from soil and vegetation was evaluated with data from a row crop (cotton). The total or combined heat fluxes from the soil and vegetation agreed to within 20% of the observed values, on average. Component heat flux predictions from the soil and vegetation indicated that soil evaporation was generally higher than canopy transpiration. This result contradicts an earlier study which showed that soil evaporation was ∼1/3 of canopy transpiration rates with a significant source of sensible heat from the soil being advected to the canopy ( Kustas, 1990). Moreover, the modeled derived canopy temperatures were ∼6 K higher and soil temperatures were ∼4 K lower than the radiometric temperature observations. In order to obtain more physically realistic soil and vegetation component heat fluxes and better agreement between the predicted and observed soil and canopy temperatures, two model parameterizations required modification. One adjustment was to the magnitude of the Priestley–Taylor coefficient α PT used in estimating canopy transpiration. The magnitude of α PT was increased by ≈50% from its `universal constant' α PT ∼ 1.3 to α PT ∼ 2. The other modification was to the free convective velocity, U CV, defined as constant in the original formulation for estimating soil resistance to sensible heat flux transfer, R S. The new formulation is based on the recent experimental results from Kondo and Ishida (1997)who found that U CV ∝ Δ T 1/3 where Δ T is the surface–air temperature difference. Both of these modifications are shown to be supported by observations from the literature and therefore are not considered merely model `tuning'. Furthermore, component heat fluxes predicted by the model using canopy and soil radiometric temperature observations support the higher α PT value and new free convective formulation for estimating R S. Two other changes to model algorithms are described which are relevant to all dual-source modeling schemes. One is replacing the commonly used Beer's law type expression for estimating the divergence of net radiation in partial canopy covered surfaces with a more physically-based algorithm. The other is a simple method to address the effects of clumped vegetation (common in row crops and sparse canopies) on radiation divergence and wind speed inside the canopy layer.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><cop>Oxford</cop><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/S0168-1923(99)00005-2</doi><tpages>17</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0168-1923
ispartof Agricultural and forest meteorology, 1999-04, Vol.94 (1), p.13-29
issn 0168-1923
1873-2240
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_18099723
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Agricultural and forest climatology and meteorology. Irrigation. Drainage
Agricultural and forest meteorology
Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions
Biological and medical sciences
CANOPY
Climatic models of plant production
COUVERT
COUVERTURE VEGETALE
CUBIERTA DE COPAS
CUBIERTA VEGETAL
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
General agronomy. Plant production
Generalities. Techniques. Climatology. Meteorology. Climatic models of plant production
INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGIQUE
INSTRUMENTOS METEOROLOGICOS
METEOROLOGICAL INSTRUMENTS
MODELE
MODELOS
PLANT COVER
Radiation balance
Remote sensing
Row crop
Surface energy balance
TEMPERATURA
TEMPERATURE
title Evaluation of soil and vegetation heat flux predictions using a simple two-source model with radiometric temperatures for partial canopy cover
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T20%3A57%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20soil%20and%20vegetation%20heat%20flux%20predictions%20using%20a%20simple%20two-source%20model%20with%20radiometric%20temperatures%20for%20partial%20canopy%20cover&rft.jtitle=Agricultural%20and%20forest%20meteorology&rft.au=Kustas,%20William%20P&rft.date=1999-04-01&rft.volume=94&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=13&rft.epage=29&rft.pages=13-29&rft.issn=0168-1923&rft.eissn=1873-2240&rft.coden=AFMEEB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0168-1923(99)00005-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E18099723%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=14508122&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0168192399000052&rfr_iscdi=true