agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526

available at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat

Testing evapotranspiration equations using lysimeter

observations in a semiarid climate

R. Lopez-Urrea a,*, F. Martn de Santa Olalla b, C. Fabeiro b, A. Moratalla b

a
Instituto Tecnico Agronomico Provincial (ITAP), c/Gregorio Arcos, s/n 02080 Apdo. 451, Albacete, Spain
b
Regional Water Research Centre, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Albacete, Spain

article info abstract

Article history: Seven methods for calculating average daily ETo were evaluated in a semiarid climate from
Accepted 12 March 2006 2000 to 2002. The methods assessed were: FAO-56 PenmanMonteith, FAO-24 Corrected
Published on line 12 May 2006 Penman (I) and (II), FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle, FAO-24 Radiation and Hargreaves. A continuous
weighing lysimeter was used with a precision of 250 g, which is equivalent to 0.04 mm of
Keywords: water. It has the necessary equipment to carry out a complete water balance and precisely
Lysimeter evaluate inputs (precipitation and irrigation) as well as outputs (evapotranspiration and
FAO-56 PenmanMonteith deep drainage). An automated agrometeorological weather station was also used that
FAO-24 Corrected Penman provided 10-min, hourly, and daily recordings of the climatic data necessary for calculating
Penman ETo. The lysimeter and the agrometeorological station are both located on a field of grass
FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle (Festuca arundinacea Schreb).
FAO-24 Radiation and Hargreaves The FAO-56 PenmanMonteith equation turned out to be the most precise method under
semiarid climatic conditions in the province of Albacete, demonstrating superiority over the
other methods evaluated. Good performance from the Hargreaves equation must be
emphasized, given the simplicity of that method, which only requires measuring mean,
maximum and minimum air temperatures. The FAO-24 Penman (I) and (II) and especially
the BlaneyCriddle methods significantly overestimated average daily ETo, while the Pen-
man method produced considerable underestimations. The radiation method also per-
formed well, in spite of giving slight overestimations.
The methods evaluated can be put in order from the most to the least accurate for the
conditions of this experiment as follows: FAO-56 PenmanMonteith, Hargreaves, FAO-24
Radiation, FAO-24 Penman (II), FAO-24 Penman (I), Penman and FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle.
The above seven equations for calculating ETo were also evaluated by differentiating two
seasons of the year, one of high evaporative demand between April and September, and the
other of low demand between October and March. In both cases, the FAO-56 Penman
Monteith equation again proved to be the most accurate.
# 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction evaporation of water stored in the soil surface layer, water

captured by plants and water loss from their surfaces, especially
Evapotranspiration (ET), the process by which water in its liquid from leaves (Jensen et al., 1990). In this latter process, known as
state evaporates from plant surfaces to the atmosphere, is one transpiration, water absorbed by the roots is later released to
of the main hydrological magnitudes. This term includes the atmosphere through stomas (Sharma, 1985).

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 967 55 07 60; fax: +34 967 55 05 10.
E-mail addresses: rlu.itap@dipualba.es (R. Lopez-Urrea), francisco.santaolalla@uclm.es (F. Martn de Santa Olalla).
0378-3774/$ see front matter # 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2006.03.014
16 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526
It is necessary to quantify ET for work dealing with water
resource management or environmental studies. Referring to
agricultural production, its measurement is greatly relevant in
arid and semiarid regions, where it is essential for determining
crop water demand and consequently for designing and
managing irrigation systems, and in general any other system
of water distribution and application to a plant cover (Gavilan,
2002).
ET quantification frequently must be preceded by the
determination of reference evapotranspiration (ETo). The
latter is defined as the rate of evapotranspiration from an
extensive area of 815 cm high, uniform, actively growing,
green grass that completely shades the soil and is well
provided with water and nutrients (Doorenbos and Pruitt,
1977). More recently, Allen et al. (1998) elaborated on the
concept of ETo, by referring it to an ideal 0.12 m high crop with
a fixed surface resistance of 70 s m
1 and an albedo of 0.23.
These authors clarified that the ET value for the ideal crop as
defined is very similar to the reference ET described by
Doorenbos and Pruitt.
At the end of the 20th century and beginning of the 21st
century, research has been undertaken in various countries,
orientated towards evaluating and calibrating various ETo
computing methods through comparison to lysimeter mea-
surements. One of the most important papers of this type was
written by Jensen et al. (1990). These researchers evaluated
and calibrated various methods of calculation, comparing
them with values obtained from lysimeters on grass or alfalfa
crops. The data used were compiled from various papers and
from personal communication. Their study used mean
monthly and daily data. Three areas were regarded: arid,
humid and miscellaneous. In all three cases, the Penman
Monteith equation (Monteith, 1965; Monteith, 1981; Allen,
1986; Allen et al., 1989) was the most accurate.
Two of the most relevant studies, undertaken in Spain on
the evaluation of various ETo computing methods using
lysimeter measurements were carried out by Mantovani
(1993) and by Gavilan (2002). Both were carried out in the
province of Cordoba. Results were substantially different.
While in the former study, the most accurate methods
for evaluating ETo were FAO-24 Penman and FAO-24
Radiation, in the latter, FAO-56 PenmanMonteith per-
formed best. The latter results coincide with what
our research team obtained in a recent Doctoral Thesis
(Lopez-Urrea, 2004).
Fig. 1 Localization of Las Tiesas experimental farm on the Iberian Peninsula.
In the last years, some researcher works have been carried
out at two semiarid locations in Spain (Zaragoza and Cordoba).
In these studies, several methods to estimate ETo were
evaluated for hourly and daily estimates (Gavilan and
Berengena, 2000; Berengena et al., 2001; Lecina et al., 2003;
Berengena and Gavilan, 2005).
This type of study is tremendously useful in the area where
it is conducted, as well as because it offers the possibility of
extrapolating results to other geographic areas with similar
conditions. It also enables irrigation advisory services and
technicians interested in the subject to distinguish the most
precise equation for calculating average daily ETo, the basis for
determining crop water requirements.
This paper presents the evaluation of various equations to
calculate evapotranspiration under the semiarid climatic
conditions in the province of Albacete. Therefore, average
daily ETo values measured with a continuous weighing
lysimeter were used.
2. Materials and methods
This study was carried out during the period from 2000 to 2002
by the lysimeter station at Las Tiesas experimental farm.
The farm is located at the city limits between Barrax and
8Albacete (Spain) and its average geographical coordinates are
latitude 398140 north, longitude 2850 west and the altitude is
695 m above sea level. The surroundings are fully representa-
tive of irrigated land in the area. Its water resources are
obtained from the Hydrological Unit Eastern Mancha. Its
location is shown in Fig. 1.
Data are available on thermal and water characteristics of
the area over a long period of time (19881999). Moreover, the
data correspond to the period in which the experiment took
place, were obtained from automated agroclimatic stations.
Fig. 2 shows the data related to temperatures and rainfall
corresponding to these periods.
The climate is characterized by pronounced seasonal
variation corresponding to its continental nature, with average
temperatures in the coldest month (January) of 45 8C and in the
hottest month (July) of 24 8C approximately. In the period from
2000 to 2002 the annual mean temperature was 13.7 8C; the
degree of sunshine was high with an average of 2800 h of
sunshine per year. Mean precipitation was 283 mm year
1
during the period under study. This precipitation is lower than
 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526
Fig. 2 Environmental conditions: period 19881999 and experimental period (20002002).
the annual average for the work area (320 mm year
1) due to low
pluviometry in the year 2000 (167 mm).
The Thornthwaite agroclimatic classification characterizes
the local climate as semiarid (D), mesothermic (B0 2), with a
total lack or a scarce excess of humidity (d), and with a
moderate concentration of water demand in summer (b0 3)
(Thornthwaite, 1948).
According to soil taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 1999), the soil
in the plot where the experimental work was carried out is
catalogued as Petrocalcic Calcixerepts. Average soil depth of
the experimental lot was 40 cm limited by the development of
the petrocalcic horizon which is more or less fragmented.
Texture is siltyclayloam, with 13.42% of sand, 48.89% of silt
and 37.69% of clay, pH is basic, and it is poor in organic matter
and total nitrogen, with a high content in active limestone and
potassium.
To obtain total available water (TAW), the difference
between field capacity (FC) and permanent wilting point
(PWP), empirical methods by Gupta and Larson (1979) and by
Rawls et al. (1982) were used as mentioned by Kern (1995). In
our case, taking a root zone depth of 30 cm into account,
results according to GuptaLarson were TAW = 35.4 mm and
according to Rawls, TAW = 33 mm. A mean value of TAW =
34.2 mm was adopted.
Readily available water (RAW) is obtained from the
equation: RAW = TAW  p, where p is depletion fraction for
no stress, expressed as quantity per unit. According to Allen
et al. (1998), p has a value of 0.4 for cool season grass when
ETc is equal to 5 mm day
1; whereas for any other ETc
value the following expression can be used: padjusted = 0.4 +
0.04 (5
ETc).
The lysimeter station has three continuous weighing
lysimeters with electronic data reading (one for reference,
one for rotating herbaceous crops and a permanent one for
grapevine). Each of them is surrounded by a square protection
plot of one hectare as shown in Fig. 3.
The reference lysimeter was used for this paper. It was
installed in the centre of a 10,000 m2 plot of meadowland
(Festuca arundinacea Schreb., cv. Asterix) maintained in
optimum growth conditions with the object of measuring
reference evapotranspiration (ETo) values. A festuca crop
was kept between 0.10 and 0.15 m in height inside the
lysimeter as well as on the protection plot, through weekly
17
mowing. Next to this lysimeter, an agro-meteorological
station is installed that has the necessary sensors to obtain
the data required for calculating reference evapotranspira-
tion (ETo) through the most frequently used classical
methods in semiarid conditions. Thus a comparison can
be made with data obtained by weighing.
The plot has an automated sprinkler irrigation system of
total underground coverage. Double nozzle sprinklers were
used of 4.8 and 2.4 mm in diameter, respectively. Mean work
pressure in each irrigation section is 320 kPa, and instant
flow is 1618 l h
1. The application rate 15 m  12.5 m,
average pluviosity of the system is 8.6 mm h
1, and the
Christiansen uniformity coefficient is 90% (Christiansen,
1942). In this way, all kinds of water restrictions can be
avoided and it is possible to maintain high water content in
the soil, close to field capacity, so that evapotranspiration
measurements thus obtained can be considered as reference
(ETo) according to FAO indications (Doorenbos and Pruitt,
1977; Allen et al., 1998).
The dimensions of the lysimeter recipient are 2.3 m 
2.7 m to a side and 1.7 m depth with approximately 14.5 t total
mass. The grass crop is kept in the same condition of growth
as the rest of the protection plot so that data will be as
representative as possible. The lysimeter has the necessary
equipment to make a complete hydric balance and precisely
Fig. 3 General diagram of the lysimeter station with the
position of the three lysimeters.
18 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526
Fig. 4 Continuous weighing lysimeter located at the ITAPs experimental farm Las Tiesas, Albacete (Spain).
evaluate inputs (rain and irrigation) as well as outputs
(evapotranspiration and deep drainage). In order to establish
the hydric state of the soil and uniformity throughout its
profile, a battery of tensiometers were installed in the
lysimeter recipient itself at various depths (15, 30, 60, 90
and 120 cm). Similarly, there are two time domain reflect-
ometer (TDR) soil moisture sensors at 30 and 60 cm,
respectively, for continual measurement of soil water
content. There are also two temperature probes at 15 and
30 cm, located the same way within the lysimeter.
The recipient, which contains soil inside, is located over a
system of balances and a counterweight that offset dead
weight from the soil and recipient. The demultiplication factor
of the system is 1000:1. A system of balances joins a 540 g steel
load cell with a nominal capacity of 50 kg, a 2 mV V
1 output
range of excitation and an input of 5 V at full load. The load cell
is connected to an electronic visor, with a resolution of 0.25 kg,
which is equivalent to 0.04 mm of water. Fig. 4 shows the
section of the reference lysimeter located at Las Tiesas lysimeter station, where software was installed to make
experimental farm.
Climatic data used in calculation formulas were recorded
by the agro-meteorological station. They are as follows.
Air temperature at 2 m: Sensor specifications are: ranging
from
40 to 60 8C; precision 0.5 8C. Relative air humidity at 2 m:
Sensor specifications are: ranging from 0 to 100%; 2%
precision. Net short wave radiation: Two pyronometers were
installed, one with a thermic detector. The spectral range of
the pyronometer is limited by transmission from the glass
dome which protects the sensor. Sensor specifications are:
spectral range 0.352.8 mm; irradiation of 11400 W m2 (max-
imum: 4000 W m
2). Net long wave radiation: A pyrgeometer
consisting of two sensors was installed. The pyrgeometer is
formed of a silicon window with a filter, a thermal detector,
temperature sensor (thermopile) and heat resistor. Sensor
specifications are: spectral range of 525 mm; irradiation
between
250 and +250 W m2 (maximum: 1000 W m
2). Wind
velocity at 2 m was measured by a very sensitive, robust cup
anemometer designed for measuring very light wind of up to
only 0.3 m s
1. Sensor specifications are: 0.3 m s
1 threshold;
050 m s
1 range; 2 m s
1 precision. Soil heat flux: A plate
formed by a set of copper wires was used to make a thermopile
hermetically sealed between two stainless steel plates. This
model assesses minimum alterations of soil heat flux. Atmo-
spheric pressure: An interpreter of atmospheric pressure was
used as a sensor whose sensitive element is a monocrystalline
silicon membrane. Its specifications are: range of 600
1100 mbar; 0.1% measurement precision; 050 8C tempera-
ture range.
All these sensors were connected to two dataloggers.
Recordings were made of all the climatic data stored every
10 min, hourly and daily. The dataloggers were collected daily
from the workplace through a modem.
Weight data generated by the lysimeter and registered on
the visor were stored in the datalogger. The equipment was
programmed to take weight readings every second (60 read-
ings per minute), and recordings were made every 15-min,
hourly and daily. The data acquisition unit was connected to a
personal computer, located in the control room of the
communication with the datalogger possible, to program it
and to obtain data files that were being generated (PC 208 W,
1998).
Erroneous data was frequently produced due to various
causes. Any weight placed on the surface of the lysimeter
affects its mass. In this way, one of the greatest sources of
error in lysimeter measurements is the force of pressure that
the wind exerts on its surface. One solution is to increase the
frequency of lysimeter mass measurements and average them
at time intervals oscillating between 10 and 30 min. It is
thought that ETo estimates cannot be measured with certain
reliability at intervals under 30 min (Howell et al., 1995).
Measurements carried out by the lysimeter are affected by
irrigation, precipitation and mowing (Gavilan, 2002). All
recordings affected by this kind of incidents were eliminated.
During research no differences were observed between the
growth of grass inside and outside of the lysimeter.
Other sources of error, which led to the elimination of
certain days are: verification of weight, calibrations from load
cell breakage, voltage drops in the system, ground wire
breakage, and datalogger failure.
 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526 19

During the year 2002, to prevent data loss on days irrigation
was necessary, 2-h night watering was done, disregarding only
the data generated during those hours, when evaporative
demand is minimum and even zero.
This research work evaluated seven ETo computing
methods, which use grass as a reference crop. These equations
are given as follows.
2.1. FAO-24 Corrected Penman (I)
The FAO-24 Corrected Penman equation (Doorenbos and
Pruitt, 1977; Jensen et al., 1990) is expressed as


D g
ETo Rn f Ues
ea c (1)
Dg Dg

1
where ETo is reference evapotranspiration (mm day ); D the
slope of saturation vapour pressure-temperature curve
(kPa 8C
1); g the psychrometric constant (kPa 8C
1); Rn the
net radiation (mm (mbar)); c the adjustment factor (Frevert
et al., 1983) (day
1); f(U) the wind function; es the saturation
vapour pressure (mbar); ea is actual vapour pressure.
The wind function is calculated as (Doorenbos and Pruitt,
1977):
 
U2
f U 0:27 1 (2)
100
where U2 is wind speed measured at 2 m (km day
1).
In all the cases, the actual vapour pressure (ea) was
calculated from the relatives humidity data, following Allen
et al. (1998):
eo Tmin RHmax =100 eo Tmax RHmin =100
ea (3)
2
where ea is actual vapour pressure (kPa); eo (Tmin) the satura-
tion vapour pressure at daily minimum temperature (kPa); eo
(Tmax) the saturation vapour pressure at daily maximum tem-
perature (kPa); RHmax the maximum relative humidity (%);
RHmin is minimum relative humidity (%).
where U2 is wind speed measured at 2 m (miles h
1); es the
saturation vapour pressure (mmHg); ea is actual vapour pres-
sure (mmHg).
2.4. FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle
With the purpose of better defining the effect of climate on
crop water requirements, the original BlaneyCriddle method
(Blaney and Criddle, 1950) was modified by Doorenbos and
Pruitt (1977) to obtain ETo by considering general levels of
minimum relative humidity, wind speed and sunshine. The
BlaneyCriddle method modified by the FAO is as follows:
ETo ab bb f (6)
where ETo is reference evapotranspiration (mm day
1); ab and
bb are coefficients of the lineal equation that relate ETo and f. In
this paper, to obtain greater precision in predicting ETo the
expressions proposed by Frevert et al. (1983) are used for
calculating coefficients ab and bb; f is the BlaneyCriddle factor
(mm day
1), which is expressed as:
f p0:46T 8:13 (7)
where p is mean daily percent of annual daytime hours; T is
mean air temperature (8C).
2.5. FAO-24 Radiation
The FAO-24 Radiation equation is expressed as (Doorenbos
and Pruitt, 1977):
ETo a bWRs (8)
where ETo is reference evapotranspiration (mm day
1); a the

0.3 (mm day
1); b the an adjustment factor that varies with
mean relative humidity and daytime wind speed (Frevert et al.,
1983); W the weighting factor, including effects of temperature
and altitude in the relationship between soil surface radiation
and crop reference evapotranspiration (Doorenbos and Pruitt,
1977); Rs is solar radiation (mm day
1).

2.2. FAO-24 Corrected Penman (II) 2.6. Hargreaves 1985

This method uses Eq. (1) and is only differentiated in the c The Hargreaves equation is expressed as (Hargreaves and
adjustment factor, which is the one calculated according to Samani, 1985; Allen et al., 1998):
Doorenbos and Pruitt (1977), later developed by Allen and
ETo 0:0023Tmean 17:8Tmax
Tmin 0:5 Ra (9)
Pruitt (1991).
where ETo is reference evapotranspiration (mm day
1); Tmean
2.3. Penman 1963 the daily mean air temperature (8C); Tmax the daily maximum
air temperature (8C); Tmin the daily minimum air temperature
The Penman equation is expressed as (Penman, 1963): (8C); Ra is the extraterrestrial radiation (mm day
1).


D g
ETo Rn Ea 0:8 (4)
Dg Dg 2.7. FAO-56 PenmanMonteith

where ETo is reference evapotranspiration (mm day
1); D the The FAO-56 PenmanMonteith equation is expressed as (Allen
slope of saturation vapour pressuretemperature curve et al., 1998):
(mmHg 8F
1); g the psychrometric constant (mmHg 8F
1); Rn 900
0:408DRn
G g T273 U2 es
ea
the net radiation (mm day
1); Ea is aerodynamic term ETo (10)
D g1 0:34U2
(mm day
1).
The aerodynamic term is calculated: where ETo is reference evapotranspiration (mm day
1); D the
slope vapour pressure curve (kPa 8C
1), Rn the net radiation at
Ea 0:351 0:0098U2 es
ea (5) the crop surface (MJ m
2 day
1); G the soil heat flux density
20 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526

(MJ m
2 day
1); T the daily mean air temperature at 2 m height

0.98
0.91
0.91
0.82
0.75
0.95
0.96

Regression analysis of the calculated values over those measured in the lysimeter. Number of observations: 215. Pavg: mean of the values calculated by various methods; Oavg: mean of values measured
in the lysimeter (3.52 mm day
1); A: ordinate at the origin; B: regression coefficient; R2: coefficient of determination; RMSE: root mean squared error; RelRMSE: relative error; d: index of agreement.
d
(8C); U2 the wind speed at 2 m height (m s
1); es the saturation
vapour pressure (kPa); ea the actual vapour pressure (kPa);
(es
ea) the saturation vapour pressure deficit (kPa); g is psy-

RelRMSE (%)
chrometric constant (kPa 8C
1).
ETo values measured by the lysimeter and computed

19.17
44.97
43.81
45.39
68.00
29.49
25.6
through various methods were compared by using simple
regression analysis (Box et al., 1989) and a series of statistics
proposed by Willmott (1982). Error was calculated as:

RMSE (mm day
1)

" #0:5
X
N
RMSE N
1 Pi
Oi 2 (11)
i1

0.67
1.58
1.54

2.39
1.04
1.6

0.9
where RMSE is root mean square error (mm day
1); N the
number of observations; Pi are estimated ETo values
(mm day
1); Oi are ETo values measured (observed) by the
lysimeter (mm day
1).
The mean square error expressed as a percentage of the ETo

R2 (mm day
1)
mean value measured in the lysimeter (Oavg) was used as a
measure of relative error (RelRMSE = RMSE/Oavg).

ETo (estimated) = A + B  ETo (lysimeter)

0.91
0.87
0.86
0.86
0.83
0.83
0.84
The index of agreement (d) was also used as a relative
measure of the difference among variables, given by:
" PN #
i1 Pi
Oi 2
d 1
PN 0d1 (12)

Oavg Oi
Oavg 2

B (mm day
1)
i1 Pi

0.91
1.22
1.24
0.59
0.85
1.00
0.88
where Oavg is mean value of the observed variable. Perfect
agreement would exist between P and O if d = 1.

3. Results and discussion

A (mm day
1)

3.1. Evaluation of ETo calculation methods during the

Table 1 Evaluation of the various methods of calculating mean daily ETo

entire year
0.43
0.32
0.07
0.25
2.74
0.26
0.3
Daily ETo values measured in the lysimeter were compared
with calculations from the various methods studied.
Pavg/Oavg (%)

This comparison was conducted from 215 observations

carried out during the 3 years that the experimental work
103
131
126
66
163
108
97

lasted.
Table 1 shows the results of this comparison, through
simple regression analysis, between the values calculated by
various methods and lysimeter measurements, indicating the
Pavg (mm day
1)

calculation of error and index of agreement. The seven

methods of calculation were taken as dependent variables
3.63
4.61
4.43
2.31
5.73
3.79
3.41

and the measurements made in the lysimeter, as the

independent variable.
Values for A, B and R2 were highly significant (P < 0.01) in all
cases.
The FAO-56 PenmanMonteith method offers the best
performance, although it gives a slight overestimation
FAO-24 Corrected Penman (II)
FAO-24 Corrected Penman (I)

(approximately 3%), with a RMSE of 0.67 mm day
1, equiva-

FAO-56 PenmanMonteith
Calculation methods

lent to a relative error under 20%. It presents a coefficient

FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle

of determination (R2) over 0.9 and a index of agreement

Hargreaves (1985)
FAO-24 Radiation

near 1. The FAO-24 Penman (I) and (II) methods signific-

Penman (1963)

antly overestimated the values of ETo around 30% in

both cases, with RMSE of approximately 1.5 mm day
1,
which is equivalent to relative errors over 40%. Results
obtained in other previous papers (Allen et al., 1989;
Jensen et al., 1990; Gavilan, 2002) also showed significant
 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526 21

overestimations (1225%), quite similar to those reached in

our work area.
The Penman method greatly underestimated daily ETo
values during the entire period studied, with a RMSE of
1.60 mm day
1, which is equivalent to a relative error over
40%. These results do not coincide with what Jensen et al.
(1990) obtained, minimum underestimations with this
equation in arid climates.
The FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle method is the one that
demonstrated the worst performance, due to the significant
overestimations it presented, with a RMSE of more than
2 mm day
1, equivalent to a relative error near 70%. In other
research papers (Jensen et al., 1990; Gavilan, 2002), this
method also produced overestimations, although they were
not as significant.
The FAO-24 Radiation method only overestimated lysi-
meter measurements by 8%. These results are very similar to
the ones obtained by Jensen et al. (1990) for arid areas. In work
carried out in Cordoba (Spain) by Mantovani (1993) and Gavilan
(2002), overestimations were of 2 and 13%, respectively. A
RMSE of 1.04 mm day
1 was presented, equivalent to a relative
error of almost 30%. This method has demonstrated very good
performance, after FAO-56 PenmanMonteith and Hargreaves.
Next to FAO-56 PenmanMonteith equation, the best
performance was shown by the Hargreaves method. It gave
way to a slight underestimation and showed the second
lowest RMSE value (0.9 mm day
1), which means a relative
error of approximately 25%.
Good coefficients of determination (R2) were obtained in all
cases, with values above 0.8. The FAO-24 Penman (I) and (II),
and especially the FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle methods are limited
by their high overestimations, and the Penman method by its
significant underestimations.
Fig. 5 shows graphs of the regressions from the three
methods that demonstrated the best performance when
compared to lysimeter measurements. The FAO-56
PenmanMonteith method (Fig. 5a) gives a small overestima-
tion under 3.5 mm day
1 approximately; between this value
and 6 mm day
1 the slope of the straight line is near 1 and
Fig. 5 Comparison between ETo values measured in the
coincides perceptibly to the intercept, which indicates the
lysimeter and those calculated, for the three methods that
correct performance of the FAO-56 PenmanMonteith method
performed the best.
in this interval. Above 6 mm day
1 it underestimates mea-
surements obtained by the lysimeter. This fact agrees with
work by Mantovani (1993) in Cordoba (Spain), where this
method underestimated ETo values mainly during periods of 3.2. Evaluation in periods of high and low evaporative
greater evaporative demand. demand
The Hargreaves method (Fig. 5c) overestimates lysimeter
measurements for ETo under 2 mm day
1, between 2 and The relationship between lysimeter measurements and the
3.5 mm day
1 approximately; the slope of the straight different methods for estimating daily ETo was also evaluated
regression line is near 1 and noticeably coincides with the during two different periods of the year, one of high
intercept, which indicates correct performance of the evaporative demand understood between the months of April
Hargreaves method for this interval of values, while above and September, and the other of low demand understood
3.5 mm day
1 it underestimates lysimeter measurements. between October and March. These two periods of the year
The whole gives rise to underestimations of 3%, similar to were differentiated with the object of discovering the most
those obtained by Mantovani (1993), and lower than those precise equation for each one of them. In the period of high
reached in papers by Jensen et al. (1990) and Gavilan (2002). evaporative demand crops of greater water consumption were
The good performance that this method presents must be planted in the field. This made it necessary to ascertain the
emphasized, since it deals with a very simple equation that value of ETo with the greatest possible accuracy.
only requires measuring maximum, minimum and mean air Table 2 shows the results from comparing the seven
temperatures. evaluated methods of calculation to lysimeter measurements
22 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526

0.93
0.70
0.70
0.50
0.63
0.83
0.85

Regression analysis of calculated values over those measured in the lysimeter. Number of observations: 95. Pavg: mean of values calculated by various methods; Oavg: mean of values measured in the
in the period from April to September during the 3 years that

d
the experimental work lasted. The different methods of
calculation were taken as dependent variables and the

lysimeter (5.57 mm day
1); A: ordinate at the origin; B: regression coefficient; R2: coefficient of determination; RMSE: root mean squared error; RelRMSE: relative error; d: index of agreement.
RelRMSE (%)
lysimeter measurements, as the independent variable.
Values for A, B and R2 were highly significant (P < 0.01) in all

14.29
38.36
38.38
39.32
39.84
23.45
20.52
cases.
Once again the FAO-56 PenmanMonteith equation shows
its superiority over the other methods studied, with the lowest
RMSE value (0.8 mm day
1), equivalent to an RelRMSE of
RMSE (mm day
1)

approximately 14%. Besides, it presents a index of agreement

over 0.9, which is the highest of all the methods evaluated.
The FAO-24 Penman (I) and (II) and the FAO-24 Blaney
Criddle methods overestimated lysimeter measurements
0.80
2.14
2.14
2.19
2.22
1.31
1.14
above or equal to 30%, with RMSE values over 2 mm day
1,
equivalent to relative errors near 40%. The Penman method
gave underestimations of 34%, with a RMSE of 2.19 mm day
1,
which is equivalent to a relative error of approximately 39%.
R2 (mm day
1)

The FAO-24 Radiation method overestimated ETo by 9%,

while the Hargreaves method underestimated it by only 2%.
Table 2 Evaluation of various methods of calculating average daily ETo, in the period of high evaporative demand

They produced RMSE values of 1.31 and 1.14 mm day
1,

ETo (estimated) = A + B  ETo (lysimeter)

0.77
0.66
0.59
0.63
0.67
0.54
0.55

respectively, equivalent to relative errors above 20% in both

cases. Both of these methods also showed very good perfor-
mance, next only to the FAO-56 PenmanMonteith method.
In all cases, the coefficient of determination (R2) decreased
B (mm day
1)

with regard to the comparison carried out for the whole year,
due to an increase in dispersion. The same thing happened in a
0.84
1.00
1.00
0.44
0.77
0.76
0.67

similar study conducted in Cordoba (Mantovani, 1993), when

dividing the year into three periods: high, medium and low
evaporative demand.
Fig. 6 graphically shows the relationship between the
measurements made on the lysimeter and the three ETo
A (mm day
1)

methods of calculation that performed the best, in the period

of high evaporative demand.
0.90
1.79
1.68
1.20
3.28
1.87
1.71

The FAO-56 PenmanMonteith method (Fig. 6a) generated a

small overestimation for values under 4 mm day
1, while
above 6 mm day
1 it appreciably underestimated lysimeter
measurements. Between 4 and 6 mm day
1 the slope of the
Pavg/Oavg (%)

straight line is near 1 and coincides markedly with the

intercept, which indicates a very good relationship between
100
132
130
66
136
109
98

this method and the lysimeter measurements in that interval

of ETo values.
The FAO-24 Radiation (Fig. 6b) method overestimates
measurements made on the lysimeter until reaching values
Pavg (mm day
1)

of approximately 8 mm day
1. Starting there, a small under-

estimation begins.
Again, during the period of high evaporative demand,
5.57
7.35
7.22
3.66
7.57
6.07
5.45

Hargreaves (Fig. 6c) is the method that shows the best

performance after the FAO-56 PenmanMonteith method. It
gives rise to a small overestimation with regard to the
lysimeter measurements until reaching values of 5 mm day
1,
1, above which an underestimation starts.
FAO-24 Corrected Penman (II)
FAO-24 Corrected Penman (I)

Table 3 shows the result of the evaluation of these same

FAO-56 PenmanMonteith
Calculation methods

methods for calculating the average daily ETo with lysimeter

FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle

measurements in the period of low evaporative demand

Hargreaves (1985)
FAO-24 Radiation

during the 3 years that the experimental work lasted. The

Penman (1963)

various calculation methods were taken as dependent vari-

ables and the lysimeter measurements, as an independent or
explicative variable.
Values for A, B and R2 turned out to be highly significant
(P < 0.01) in all cases.
 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526 23

0.88
0.76
0.81
0.64
0.25
0.81
0.81

Regression analysis of calculated values over those measured in the lysimeter. Number of observations: 120. Pavg: mean of values calculated by various methods; Oavg: mean of values measured in the
d

lysimeter (1.89 mm day
1); A: ordinate at the origin; B: regression coefficient; R2: coefficient of determination; RMSE: root mean squared error; RelRMSE: relative error; d: index of agreement.
RelRMSE (%)

29.65
49.55
42.43
46.58
133.52
40.32
34.32
RMSE (mm day
1)

0.56
0.94

0.88
2.52
0.76
0.65
0.8
R2 (mm day
1)
Table 3 Evaluation of various methods of calculating average daily ETo, in the period of low evaporative demand
ETo (estimated) = A + B  ETo (lysimeter)

0.66
0.53
0.54
0.52
0.36
0.49
0.48
B (mm day
1)

0.81
0.93
0.91
0.47

0.84
0.59
0.7
A (mm day
1)

0.56
0.69
0.48
0.36
2.95

0.67
0.4
Pavg/Oavg (%)

111
129
117
66
226
105
95

Fig. 6 Comparison between ETo values measured in the

lysimeter and those estimated, for the three methods that
presented the best performance, in the period of high
evaporative demand (months of April to September).
Pavg (mm day
1)

The best performance continues to correspond to the FAO-

2.09
2.44
2.21
1.25
4.27
1.98
1.8

56 PenmanMonteith method, which in spite of overestimat-

ing by 11%, presents the best coefficient of determination and
index of agreement, and the lowest RMSE and RelRMSE values.
Also, the FAO-24 Radiation and the Hargreaves methods have
good performance again, although the former overestimates
FAO-24 Corrected Penman (II)
FAO-24 Corrected Penman (I)

and the latter underestimates, both by 5%, with RMSE values

FAO-56 PenmanMonteith

around 0.7 mm day
1 and relative errors of 40 and 34%,

Calculation methods

FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle

respectively.
Hargreaves (1985)
FAO-24 Radiation

The FAO-24 Penman (I) and (II) methods overestimated

Penman (1963)

lysimeter measurements by 17 and 29%, respectively, for this

period, with RMSE under 1 mm day
1, which is equivalent to
relative errors above 40%. The Penman method underesti-
mated ETo measurements by more than 30%, with a RMSE of
0.88 mm day
1, equivalent to an RelRMSE of more than 45%.
24 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526
The FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle method performed the worst in
this period, due to significant overestimations, above 100%
with a RMSE value of 2.52 mm day
1, equivalent to a relative
error over 130%. Besides it presents the lowest coefficient of
determination.
The same as in the period of high evaporative demand, a
decrease in coefficients of determination was brought about in
all the equations evaluated in the period of low evaporative
demand, due to an increase of the dispersion of the compared
ETo values.
Fig. 7 presents the graphs where the measurements
conducted in the lysimeter are compared to the three methods
of calculation that performed the best in the period of low
evaporative demand. The FAO-56 PenmanMonteith equation
(Fig. 7a) overestimated for values of ETo under 2.5 mm day
1
and underestimated above 3.5 mm day
1. The FAO-24 Radia-
tion method (Fig. 7b) overestimated below values of approxi-
Fig. 7 Comparison between ETo values measured in the
lysimeter and those calculated, for the three methods that
performed the best, in the period of low evaporative
demand (months of October to March).
mately 2 mm day
1 and underestimated above 3.5 mm day
1.
The Hargreaves method (Fig. 7c) overestimated under
1.5 mm day
1 and above this value it underestimated lysi-
meter measurements.
The results of evaluating the seven methods studied
demonstrate the superiority of the FAO-56 PenmanMonteith
equation over the others. This fact coincides with the results
obtained in other similar papers (Jensen et al., 1990; Gavilan,
2002), in which the FAO-56 PenmanMonteith method under-
estimated ETo very slightly, 1 and 3%, respectively, with RMSE
of 0.41 and 0.42 mm day
1. Meanwhile in the present paper
this method overestimated lysimeter measurements by 3%,
with a RMSE of 0.67 mm day
1.
The FAO-24 Penman (I) and (II) methods produced very
similar overestimations, although somewhat higher, to those
given in papers by Allen et al. (1989), Jensen et al. (1990) and
Gavilan (2002). The FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle equation produced
much higher overestimations than those obtained in Cordoba
by Gavilan (2002).
According to Jensen et al. (1990) the Penman method
underestimated the lysimetric measurements by 2%, with a
RMSE of 0.58 mm day
1, while in our study area it gave
underestimations of 34% and a RMSE of 1.60 mm day
1.
The results obtained through the FAO-24 Radiation method
under climatic conditions in Albacete are very similar to those
presented by Jensen et al. (1990), with overestimations of 8 and
6%, respectively.
The Hargreaves method slightly underestimated lysimeter
measurements as also happened in experiments by Jensen
et al. (1990) and Gavilan (2002). Although in our study area this
method performed better than in previous papers.
4. Conclusions
In a semiarid climate such as the work area, the FAO-56
PenmanMonteith method was the most adequate for calculat-
ing average daily ETo, when comparing it to lysimeter
measurements. The Hargreaves equation was the second most
precise, in spite of the simplicity of this method. The FAO-24
Radiation method also showed good performance, although it
produced a small overestimation. The FAO-24 Penman (I) and
(II) methods, and especially the FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle method
significantly overestimated lysimeter measurements, while the
Penman equation considerably underestimated ETo.
In the period of high evaporative demand, the FAO-56
PenmanMonteith method continued to render the best
performance, followed by the Hargreaves and the FAO-24
Radiation methods. During this period the FAO-24 Penman (I)
and (II) and the FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle methods also over-
estimated ETo lysimeter measurements, while the Penman
equation continued producing significant underestimations.
In the period of low evaporative demand, the FAO-56
PenmanMonteith equation was again the most precise, but
its performance was worse than in the period of high demand.
The Hargreaves and FAO-24 Radiation methods again showed
good performance. The FAO-24 Penman (I) and (II) methods,
and especially the FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle method continued
overestimating lysimeter measurements. The Penman equa-
tion underestimated them.
 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526
The seven methods evaluated can be put in order from the
best to the worst performance, taking daily ETo values
measured in the lysimeter as a reference, in the following
way: FAO-56 PenmanMonteith, Hargreaves, FAO-24 Radia-
tion, FAO-24 Corrected Penman (II), FAO-24 Corrected Penman
(I), Penman and FAO-24 BlaneyCriddle.
Local as well as regional diffusion of the results from this
research will be largely conducted by the Irrigation Users
Association of Eastern Mancha (IUAMO) (Martn de Santa Olalla
et al., 2003) and the Irrigation Advisory Service of Albacete (IAS)
(Montoro Rodrguez et al., 2002). This service is managed by the
Instituto Tecnico Agronomico Provincial (ITAP), which has Gavilan, P.D., 2002. La adveccion de calor sensible en el Valle
wide experience in technology transfer. IAS technicians
calculate crop water requirements daily, and reference evapo-
transpiration is the basis for those calculations.
As a consequence of technology transfer mechanisms,
through ITAP as well as IUAMO, the results of this experi-
mental work will affect more than 5000 users daily who
cultivate some 105,000 ha of irrigated surface area, as well as
the entire population (over 275,000 people) located in this
geographical area.
From the viewpoint of its external projection, the results of
this research can be applied to semiarid environments outside
the ambit where the experiment was conducted. The
Mediterranean basin, on its northern side, corresponding to
southern Europe, as well as in the countries of the Maghrib or
the Near East, offers wide geographical areas where the
conclusions obtained from this paper can be applied.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the anonymous referees
helpful comments and suggestions. We should also like to put
on record that the work described above was made possible
thanks to the project Use of Lysimetry in the Irrigation
Advisory Service (Ref. 1FD-97-1709), funded by the Inter-
Ministry Commission of Science and Technology (CICYT),
Spain.
references
Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 1998. Crop
Evapotranspiration. Guidelines for Computing Crop Water
Requirements. FAO, Rome, FAO Irrigation and Drainage,
paper no. 56.
Allen, R.G., Pruitt, W.O., 1991. FAO-24 reference
evapotranspiration factors. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. ASCE 117 (5),
758773.
Allen, R.G., Jensen, M.E., Wright, J.L., Burman, R.D., 1989.
Operational estimates of reference evapotranspiration.
Agron. J. 81, 650662.
Allen, R.G., 1986. A Penman for all seasons. J. Irrig. Drain Eng.
ASCE 112 (4), 348368.
Berengena, J., Gavilan, P., Marquez, F., 2001. Precision de las
estimaciones de la ETo en un ambiente advectivo. In:
Proceedings of the 19th Congreso Nacional de Riegos,
Zaragoza, Spain.
Berengena, J., Gavilan, P., 2005. Reference evapotranspiration
estimation in a highly advective semiarid environment. J.
Irrig. Drain. Eng. ASCE 131 (2), 147163.
25
Blaney, H.F., Criddle, W.D., 1950. Determining water
requirements in irrigated areas from climatological and
irrigation data. In: USDA Soil Conserv. Serv., SCS-TP-96,
44 pp.
Box, G.E.P., Hunter, W.G., Hunter, J.S., 1989. Estadstica para
investigadores. Reverte, Barcelona, 675 pp.
Christiansen, J., 1942. Irrigation by Sprinkling. Calf. Agric. Exp.
Stn. B-670. Berkeley, CA, 94720, pp. 110116.
Doorenbos, J., Pruitt, W.O., 1977. Crop Water Requirements.
FAO, Rome, FAO Irrigation and Drainage, paper no. 24 (rev.).
Frevert, D.K., Hill, R.W., Braaten, B.C., 1983. Estimation of FAO
evapotranspiration coefficients. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. ASCE 109
(IR2), 265270.
Medio del Guadalquivir y su influencia en la medida y
estimacion de la evapotranspiracion. Ph.D. Thesis, Cordoba
University, Spain.
Gavilan, P.D., Berengena, J., 2000. Comportamiento de los
metodos de PenmanFAO y PenmanMonteith-FAO en el
valle medio del Guadalquivir. In: Proceedings of the 18th
Congreso Nacional de Riegos, Huelva, Spain.
Gupta, S.C., Larson, W.E., 1979. Estimating soil water retention
characteristics from particle size distribution, organic
matter content, and bulk density. Water Resour. 15,
16331635.
Hargreaves, G.H., Samani, Z.A., 1985. Reference crop
evapotranspiration from temperature. Appl. Eng. Agric. 1
(2), 9699.
Howell, T.A., Schneider, A.D., Dusek, D.A., Marek, T.H., Steiner,
J.L., 1995. Calibration and scale performance of Bushland
weighing lysimeters. Trans. ASAE 38 (4), 10191024.
Jensen, M.E., Burman, R.D., Allen, R.G. (Eds.), 1990.
Evapotranspiration and water irrigation requirements.
Committee on irrigation Water Requirements, Irrigation
and Drainage Division of ASCE, Manual no. 70. Am. Soc.
Civil Eng., New York, 332 pp.
Kern, J.S., 1995. Evaluation of soil water retention models based
on basic soil physical properties. Soil Sci. Am. J. 59, 1134
1141.
Lecina, S., Martnez-Cob, A., Perez, P.J., Villalobos, F.J., Baselga,
J.J., 2003. Fixed versus variable bulk canopy resistente for
reference evapotranspiration estimation using the
PenmanMonteith equation under semiarid conditions.
Agric. Water Manage. 60, 181198.
Lopez-Urrea, R., 2004. Evapotranspiracion de referencia:
metodos de calculo y de medicion directa en una estacion
lisimetrica en ambientes semiaridos. Ph.D. Thesis, Castilla-
La Mancha University, Spain.
Mantovani, E.C., 1993. Desarrollo y evaluacion de modelos para
el manejo del riego; estimacion de la evapotranspiracion y
efectos de la uniformidad de aplicacion del riego sobre la
produccion de cultivos. Ph.D. Thesis, Cordoba University,
Spain.
Martn de Santa Olalla, F.J., Calera, A., Domnguez, A., 2003.
Monitoring irrigation water use by combining Irrigation
Advisory Service, and remote sensed data with a geographic
information system. Agric. Water Manage. 61, 111124.
Monteith, J.L., 1965. Evaporation and the environment. The state
and movement of water in living organisms.In: XIXth
Symposium. Soc. for Exp. Biol., Swansea, Cambridge
University Press, pp. 205234.
Monteith, J.L., 1981. Evaporation and surface temperature.
Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 107, 127.
Montoro Rodrguez, A., Lopez Corcoles, H., Lopez Fuster, P.,
2002. An Advisory service for irrigation in the plains of La
Mancha, Spain. In: Workshop Organised by FAO-ICID, 24
July 2002, Montreal, Canada.
PC 208W, 1998. PC 208W Version 3.0. Datalogger Support
Software. Ayuda de Microsoft Windows.
26 agricultural water management 85 (2006) 1526

Penman, H.L., 1963. Vegetation and Hydrology. In: Tech. Comm.
53, Commonwealth Bureau of Soil, Harpenden, England,
125 pp.
Rawls, W.L., Brakensiek, D.L., Saxton, K.E., 1982. Estimation of
soil water properties. Trans ASAE 25, 13161320.
Sharma, M.L., 1985. Estimating evapotranspiration. In: Hillel, D.
(Ed.), Advances in Irrigation, vol. 3. Academic Press, Inc.,
pp. 213281.
Soil Survey Staff, 1999. Soil Taxonomy. A basic system of soil
classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. In:
Agriculture Handbook no. 466, second ed. USDA,
Washington.
Thornthwaite, C.W., 1948. An approach toward a rational
classification of climate. Geograph. Rev. 38, 55.
Willmott, C.J., 1982. Some comments on the evaluation of model
performance. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 63 (11), 13091313.