A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Research on methods for estimating reference crop evapotranspiration under incomplete meteorological indicators. | LitMetric

Background: Accurate estimation of reference crop evapotranspiration (ET) is crucial for farmland hydrology, crop water requirements, and precision irrigation decisions. The Penman-Monteith (PM) model has high accuracy in estimating ET, but it requires many uncommon meteorological data inputs. Therefore, an ideal method is needed that minimizes the number of input data variables without compromising estimation accuracy. This study aims to analyze the performance of various methods for estimating ET in the absence of some meteorological indicators. The Penman-Monteith (PM) model, known for its high accuracy in ET estimation, served as the standard value under conditions of adequate meteorological indicators. Comparative analyses were conducted for the Priestley-Taylor (PT), Hargreaves (H-A), McCloud (M-C), and FAO-24 Radiation (F-R) models. The Bayesian estimation method was used to improve the ET estimation model.

Results: Results indicate that, compared to the PM model, the F-R model performed best with inadequate meteorological indicators. It demonstrates higher average correlation coefficients (R) at daily, monthly, and 10-day scales: 0.841, 0.937, and 0.914, respectively. The corresponding root mean square errors (RMSE) are 1.745, 1.329, and 1.423, and mean absolute errors (MAE) are 1.340, 1.159, and 1.196, with Willmott's Index (WI) values of 0.843, 0.862, and 0.859. Following Bayesian correction, R values remained unchanged, but significant reductions in RMSE were observed, with average reductions of 15.81%, 29.51%, and 24.66% at daily, monthly, and 10-day scales, respectively. Likewise, MAE decreased significantly, with average reductions of 19.04%, 34.47%, and 28.52%, respectively, and WI showed improvement, with average increases of 5.49%, 8.48%, and 10.78%, respectively.

Conclusion: Therefore, the F-R model, enhanced by the Bayesian estimation method, significantly enhances the estimation accuracy of ET in the absence of some meteorological indicators.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11260813PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2024.1354913DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

meteorological indicators
20
methods estimating
8
reference crop
8
crop evapotranspiration
8
penman-monteith model
8
model high
8
high accuracy
8
estimation accuracy
8
absence meteorological
8
bayesian estimation
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!