Modelling The Daily Reference Evapotranspiration in Semi-Arid Region of South India: A Case Study Comparing ANFIS and Empirical Models

Available at www.sciencedirect.
com
INFORMATION PROCESSING IN AGRICULTURE xxx (xxxx) xxx
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/inpa
Modelling the daily reference evapotranspiration in

semi-arid region of South India: A case study
comparing ANFIS and empirical models
Ramiro T. Gonzalez del Cerro a, M.S.P Subathra b, Nallapaneni Manoj Kumar c,d,*,
Sebastian Verrastro a, S. Thomas George b
a
Departamento de Ingenieria Electronica, Facultad Regional Buenos Aires, Universidad Tecnologica Nacional, Buenos Aires, Argentina
b
Department of Electrical Sciences, Karunya Institute of Technology and Sciences, Coimbatore 641114, Tamil Nadu, India
c
School of Energy and Environment, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China
d
Sustainable Solutionz, T Nagar, Chennai-600017, Tamil Nadu, India
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Article history: The estimation of evapotranspiration (ETo) is one of the main tools for the control of crop
Received 26 March 2019 growth and to make a rational use of water resources. To estimate this parameter accu-
Received in revised form rately, it is necessary to have a daily measurement of four meteorological variables, these
23 January 2020 are: temperature, solar radiation, relative humidity and wind speed. It is not always possi-
Accepted 17 February 2020 ble to count on all the variables, that is why there are empirical methods that use a limited
Available online xxxx number of variables that make an approximate estimate of the ETo value. Each of these
models are applicable to different regions with completely different climates. In this paper,
Keywords: a study has been carried out to define the model of ETo estimation that best adapts to the
Evapotranspiration semi-arid region in South India. Two different datasets for the same period from different
ANFIS meteorological stations were used. In addition to the empirical methods for estimating ETo,
ANN computer models ANFIS (Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System) were implemented.
Semi-arid regions in India These models consist in the future estimation of a certain parameter by using current vari-
Coimbatore ables and a history of variables and past results. The results of this work show that ANFIS
RITCHIE method 11 model makes the best estimate with RMSD = 0.002 and r = 0.999. The RITCHIE method is
the most suitable empirical model for this region, which reaches RMSD = 0.507 and
r = 0.851. In addition, ranking of equations is elaborated for both datasets for daily esti-
mates of ETo. Finally, comparison is made with the results for each case and thus confirm
or reject the convenience of one model over the rest. To achieve this, a series of statistical
indicators were used: Index of agreement (d), MAE (Mean absolute error), SEE (Standard
error of estimate) and RMSD (Root mean square difference). Moreover, a sensitivity analysis
was performed in order to compare and show the stability of the best models when an error
is introduced within the input parameters. In this case, the empirical models demonstrate
a better performance than the ANFIS models. This work demonstrates that the Ritchie
method is a good estimator of the ETo value for a semi-arid region in southern India. In
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: subathra@karunya.edu (M.S.P Subathra), mnallapan2-c@my.cityu.edu.hk (N. Manoj Kumar), thomasgeorge@kar-
unya.edu (S. Thomas George).
Peer review under responsibility of China Agricultural University.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inpa.2020.02.003
2214-3173 Ó 2020 China Agricultural University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Please cite this article as: R. T. Gonzalez del Cerro, M. S. P. Subathra, N. Manoj Kumar et al., Modelling the daily reference evapotranspiration in semi-arid region
of South India: A case study comparing ANFIS and empirical models, Information Processing in Agriculture, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inpa.2020.02.003
2 Information Processing in Agriculture xxx (xxxx) xxx
addition, the results of the ANFIS models are promising and could be used as estimation
methods.
Ó 2020 China Agricultural University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of
KeAi. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
1. Introduction Radiation models for the region of Maharashtra. In [6] the

Kharrufa model is the most accurate method for Burdwan,
Evapotranspiration is the process by which plants transmit West Bengal.
water to the environment by two separate processes, evapo- Outside India, in [7] it is evaluated the situation for seven
ration and transpiration [1]. Both events occur simultaneously humid locations in the Western Balkans where it is claimed
and there is no easy way of distinguishing between each that the Turc method is the most suitable for the region. In
other. Its estimation is important for an accurate calculation [8] different models for humid East China are analyzed arriv-
of the amount of water necessary for the irrigation of the dif- ing to the conclusion that Turc is the best model to make an
ferent crops. Their correct use would greatly reduce the ETo estimate. In [9] it is studied the case of the humid region
amount of water used for irrigation. This depends on weather in northern Iran and defines the methods of Blanney-Criddle,
variables such as solar radiation, relative humidity, tempera- Hargreaves-M4, Snyder, Irmak, Ritchie, Allen and Pruitt, FAO-
ture, wind speed etc., the type of crop and characteristics of 24 pan table and Cuenca as the models that best adapted to
the environment. the area. Moreover, in [10] an assessment of ETo models
For a precise estimation the Penman-Monteith (FAO56PM) demonstrate that Caprio and Hargreaves models are the best
formula, recommended by the FAO - Food and Agriculture adapted for a semiarid region in Iran. In [11] an ETo analysis
Organization of the United Nations -, is used. However, for sub-humid and humid regions in China shows that
the use of this formula is limited by climatic parameters Valiantzas3 is the best alternative model. In [12] an evaluation
that sometimes are not completely gathered. These are: of the reference ETo equations concludes that Valiantzas,
temperature, relative humidity, solar radiation and wind Makkink, Hargreaves, Jensen-Haise and Caprio have the best
speed. performance in a semi-arid dry climate in New Mexico. In
There are different studies that make an approximation to [13] different methods were used to determine olive trees irri-
the ETo for different climatic conditions using a reduced gation schedule in different bioclimatic stages of Tunisia and
amount of information. In this study these standardized Priestley-Taylor and Blaney-Criddle formulas presents the
methods are collected and applied to determine which model best results.
best suits the climatic conditions of the Coimbatore region. Furthermore, there are some studies that use different
On the other hand, with the amount of information obtained, machine learning models for the ETo estimation and compare
Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) models, an them with empirical models. In [14] Hargreaves and Turc
especial kind of Artificial Neural Network (ANN) combined models are compared with ANN model, in which the last
with fuzzy logic, are developed. In this way, the complex one presents a better performance. In [15], ANFIS and empir-
and non-linear phenomenon of ETo can be estimated by sim- ical models are analyzed for western Iran, where ANFIS meth-
ply knowing the input variables and their history of previous ods achieved better results. In [16] different ANFIS models are
results. Empirical models introduce simplified equations for compared with empirical models in Turkey. They observe that
complex phenomena and its approximation depends on local the ANFIS models of three and four inputs presented better
climatic parameters, therefore, they often do not show a good results than the empirical models of the same number of
performance. Thus, ANFIS models could be a good estimator inputs, but also that the empirical models of two inputs were
when a large data set is gathered. better than their corresponding ANFIS. In [17] an extreme
An extensive literature can be found about different meth- learning machine (ELM) algorithm was used to estimate
ods for the ETo estimation. The results change with the loca- weekly reference crop ETo located in the Thar Desert, India.
tion and with the different models that are under study. Some The authors concluded that the ELM model performed better
studies analyze only empirical models inside India. In this than the Hargreaves and ANN model. In [18] different
way, in [2] some empirical models for the northeastern region machine learning algorithms were built to predict actual
of India are analyzed and it is concluded that the models ETo at a Central Florida site, with a humid subtropical climate.
based on Irmak 3, Turc and Makkink radiation present the They compared different models and concluded that is possi-
best results. In [3] ETo is evaluated for four locations in India ble to build a reliable machine learning model for predicting
using six different models, concluding that the FAO24 Blaney- actual ETo starting from mean temperature, net solar radia-
Criddle model is the best recommendation for humid regions. tion and relative humidity data. In [19] an adaptive neuro-
In [4] seven models are used for four different cities and they fuzzy inference system integrated with firefly optimization
concluded Hargreaves and Turc are respectively the most algorithm was developed and tested for the prediction of
suitable models for sub-humid and humid regions. Further- ETo in Burkina Faso region, West Africa. The results corrobo-
more, in [5] a comparative study for ETo estimation presents rated the superiority of the ANFIS-FA model compared with
a ranking with the best models including Hargreaves and the classical ANFIS model.
Information Processing in Agriculture xxx (xxxx) xxx 3
Additionally, some studies introduce a sensitivity analysis The ISRO satellite is located in geostationary orbit (GEO) at
for ETo estimation. In [20] a sensitivity analysis of ETo in a 32.5° E, 83° E, and 131.5° E longitude. For both cases, mean
humid region in Iran is performed. It is showed that the most daily values were used around a four-year period from 2012
sensitive parameter was air temperature. In [21] a sensitivity to 2015.
analysis of the Penman–Monteith reference ET equation for
different climate types in Brazil is carried out. In order of 2.2. Selection of ETo methods
importance, it is showed that ETo is most sensitive to annual
variation in vapor pressure, wind speed and solar radiation in Different methods have been analyzed for the calculation of
all climate types. In [22] the sensitivity of Penman-Monteith ETo. These are listed on Table 1 with their corresponding
type equations to the major climatic variables in the Mediter- equation. Penman-Monteith standardized estimate is used
ranean region of Turkey is determined. ETo is more sensitive for the analysis and comparison between the different
to the net radiation in all seasons; followed by the air temper- formulas.
ature in the summer months, and by the relative humidity in
the winter months. 2.3. Estimation of ETo reference value
To conclude, there is a wide variety of literature regarding
the topics to be discussed in this work. It is observed that, the The concept of reference surface is introduced to avoid
models may not work in the same for each location and they unique evaporation parameters for each crop and for each
seem to have variation in the observed results. In addition, stage of growth. The FAO Expert Consultations on the Review
the expected conclusions also vary according to the location of FAO Methodologies for Crop Water Requirements define
under study and the applied model. In addition, no research the reference surface for the case of ‘‘a height of 0.12 m, a
work performs a detailed analysis, including a wide variety fixed surface resistance of 70 s/m and an albedo of 0.23”.
of models and a sensitivity analysis for the semi-arid region The process of evaporation is described by two fundamen-
of southern India. tal phenomena: a water balance and an energy balance. On
In this paper, a study has been carried out to define the the one hand, rainfall, evaporation, transpiration and mois-
model of ETo estimation that best adapts to the semi-arid ture affect the water balance. On the other hand, radiation,
region in South India. The contributions include the heat flow and heat conduction affect the energy balance. In
following: these two phenomena, the theory is based on the elaboration
of the different estimation methods for ETo. In some cases,
the costs of operation and maintenance of ETo measuring
Estimation of ETo using the empirical methods and ANFIS equipment, called lysimeters, make its implementation not
(Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System) based computer a feasible possibility. In this way, the FAO Penman-Monteith
models for semi-arid region of South India. method to estimate ETo is defined as in (1):
0:408:D:ðRn GÞ þ c: Tþ273
900
:u2 :ðes ea Þ
Future estimation of a certain parameter by using current ETo ¼ ð1Þ
D þ c:ð1 þ 0:34:u2 Þ
variables and a history of variables and past results is also
considered in these models. where,
ETo refers to evapotranspiration [mm/day];
Comparison of the empirical and ANFIS models to select Rn refers to net radiation at the crop surface [MJ/m2.day];
best model for estimating ETo. G is the soil heat flux density [MJ/m2.day];
T is the mean daily air temperature at 2 m height [°C];
A sensitivity analysis was performed in order to compare u2 is the wind speed at 2 m height [m/s];
and show the stability of the best models when an error es is the saturation vapor pressure [kPa]; ea is the actual
is introduced within the input parameters. vapor pressure [kPa];
es – ea is the saturation vapor pressure deficit [kPa];
D is the slope vapor pressure curve [kPa/°C]; c is the psy-
chrometric constant [kPa/°C].
2. Methodology The equation uses standard climate records of solar radia-
tion, air temperature, humidity, and wind speed. Also, to
2.1. Place of study and origin of data ensure the integrity of the calculations, climate measure-
ments should be made at 2 m or corrected for that height.
In this paper, the ETo estimations are presented through dif- The ETo calculations were performed daily using Matlab.
ferent models for the region of Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
(latitude 11°10 N, longitude 76°580 E, elevation 411 m). In this 2.4. Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS)
area, the climate is semi-arid with an average annual rainfall
of 657 mm. It has a mean temperature around 31.5 °C and ANN is a powerful tool for the modeling of various complex
21.4 °C, maximum and minimum respectively. On the one and nonlinear systems. In addition, their combination with
hand, part of the data used for this work was obtained from fuzzy logic solves problems at a higher speed. In this case, a
ISRO Trivandrum – Indian Space Research Organization - five-layer Sugeno model is used because it is the most compu-
and, on the other hand, from the NASA - National Aeronau- tationally efficient model and therefore the most used. To
tics and Space Administration - (http://power.larc.nasa.gov/). implement the algorithm, a set of training data that contains
Table 1 – Details of selected methods for evaluation and input parameters in each method including their references.
Equation Ref. Formula Parameter
Radiation based
Caprio [23] ETo ¼ ð0:01092708 T þ 0:0060706Þ Rs RS, T
Irmak 1 [24] ETo ¼ 0:611 þ 0:149:Rs þ 0:079:T RS, T
Irmak 2 [9] ETo ¼ 0:642 þ 0:174:Rs þ 0:0353:T RS, T
Irmak 3 ETo ¼ 0:478 þ 0:156:Rs 0:0112:TMAX þ 0:0733:TMIN RS, TMAX, TMIN
Mcguiness-Bordne [25] ETo ¼ ð0:005 T 0:0838Þ Rs RS, TMAX, TMIN
Ritchie [26] ETo ¼ Rs :a:ð0:00232:TMAX þ 0:00154:Tp ffiffiffiffiffiffiþ
MIN ffi 0:1122Þ RS, TMAX, TMIN
Jensen-Haise [27] ETo ¼ 0:408 CT ðT Tx Þ KT Ra TD RS, T, TMAX, TMIN
s þ50
Turc [28] ETo ¼ aT 0:013 Tþ15
T
23:8856R
k RS, T
Modified Turc [29] ETo ¼ Cu 0:013 Tþ15
T
ð23:88 Rs þ 50ÞWhereCu RS, T, U2
¼ 0:0211 U2 2 þ 0:1109 U2 þ 0:9004
D Rs
Makkink [30] ETo ¼ 0:61 Dþc 2:45 0:12 RS, T
D R G
Priestley-Taylor [31] ETo ¼ 1:26 Dþc
nk RS, T, TMAX, TMIN
D
Fao24-Radiation [32] ETo ¼ a þ b Dþc Rs RS, T
Temperature based pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Hargreaves [33] ETo ¼ 0:0023 TDðT þ 17:8Þ Ra T, TMAX, TMIN
Hargreaves 1 [34] ETo ¼ 0:408 0:0030 ðT þ 20Þ TD0:4 Ra
Hargreaves 2 ETo ¼ 0:408 0:0025 ðT þ 16:8Þ TD0:5 Ra
Fao24 Blaney-Criddle [35] ETo ¼ a þ b P ð0:46 T þ 8:13Þð1 þ 0:0001 EÞ T, n, RHMIN
Baier-Robertson [36] ETo ¼ 0:157 TMAX þ 0:158 TD þ 0:109 Ra 5:39 TMAX, TMIN
Note: ETo, Rn, Rs, G, D, c, U2, T are defined in the FAO56PM subsection 2.3. CT, Cu, TX, KT, a, a, b, aT, P are the empirical coefficients. TD = TMAX-
TMIN, TMAX, TMIN maximum and minimum air temperature (°C). RH, RHMIN mean and minimum relative humidity (%). Ra extraterrestrial
radiation (MJ/m2/day). k latent heat of evapotranspiration = 2.45(MJ/Kg). U2 long term mean annual wind speed at 2 m (m/s).
the number of inputs with their corresponding output must and four variables (solar radiation, relative humidity, wind
be defined. It is also necessary to know the number and type speed and temperature). In total, there are six models of
of membership functions for each entry. Then the informa- two variables, four models of three variables and one
tion learned is used to estimate ETo future values, see in model of four variables. In addition, three different member-
Fig. 1. ship functions have been used for each model (Gaussian
In this case, three of the four years (2012–2014) are used for curve, Triangular-shaped and Generalized bell-shaped)
training and one year (2015) is used for testing. The ANFIS and the best results possible have been achieved in each
models developed are all possible combinations of two, three case.
Fig. 1 – A five-layer Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System model for estimating ETo.
Table 2 – ANFIS models using ISRO and NASA data.

Name Data requirements Data set Membership function Optimal number of MFs RMSD
ANFIS 1 RS, U2 ISRO Generalized bell-shaped 2 0.312

NASA Gaussian curve 3 0.339
ANFIS 2 U2, T ISRO Triangular-shaped 2 0.390
NASA 3 1.020
ANFIS 3 T, RH ISRO Generalized bell-shaped 3 0.542
NASA 0.628
ANFIS 4 RS, T ISRO Triangular-shaped 2 0.368
NASA 3 0.312
ANFIS 5 RS, RH ISRO Generalized bell-shaped 2 0.323
NASA Gaussian curve 3 0.236
ANFIS 6 U2, RH ISRO Gaussian curve 2 0.515
NASA 3 0.705
ANFIS 7 RS, U2, T ISRO Gaussian curve 2 0.149
NASA Triangular-shaped 3 0.336
ANFIS 8 RS, U2, RH ISRO Gaussian curve 2 0.120
NASA 0.211
ANFIS 9 U2, T, RH ISRO Gaussian curve 2 0.363
NASA Triangular-shaped 0.606
ANFIS 10 RS, T, RH ISRO Generalized bell-shaped 2 0.304
NASA 0.192
ANFIS 11 RS, U2, T, RH ISRO Generalized bell-shaped 2 0.002
NASA Triangular-shaped 0.062
Table 2 defines the number of ANFIS functions with their 2.5.2. Mean Absolute Error (MAE)
corresponding variables and membership functions for both
data sets. PN
ETFAO56PM;i ETEq;i
i¼1
MAE ¼ ð3Þ
N
2.5. Performance comparison for different ETo methods
2.5.3. Standard Error of Estimate (SEE)
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2 ffi
u
u
N N N 2 3
u P P P
u 6 X !2 N: ETFAO56PM;i ETEq;i ETFAO56PM;i : ETEq;i 7
u 1 6 N X N 7
SEE ¼ u :6 N: ET 2
ET i¼1

i¼1

i¼1 7 ð4Þ
uN:ðN 2Þ 6 4 i¼1
Eq;i Eq;i
PN PN 2 7
5
t i¼1
N: ETFAO56PM;i 2 ETFAO56PM;i
i¼1 i¼1
It becomes necessary to develop a ranking among all the

methods to determine which are the ones that best suits
the climatic conditions of the region of Coimbatore in South
India. 2.5.4. Root Mean Square Difference (RMSD)
The indicators that are used for this purpose are four:
Index of agreement shown in (2), Mean absolute error shown vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
uN 2
uP
u
ti¼1 ETFAO56PM;i ETEq;i
in (3), Standard error of estimate shown in (4) and Root mean
square difference shown in (5). RMSD ¼ ð5Þ
N
2.5.1. Index of Agreement (d)

2.6. Sensitivity analysis
d¼1
PN 2 When working with different kind of sensors a data error
ETFAO56PM;i
i¼1 ETEq;i could be introduced within the input parameters caused not
ð2Þ
PN
2

i¼1 ETEq;i ETFAO56PM;i þ ETFAO56PM;i ETFAO56PM;i
only by the noise and the accuracy of the electrical circuits
Fig. 2 – Scattering diagrams between FAO56PM ETo and the best four models using NASA data: Ritchie, Baier-Robertson,
Priestley-Taylor and Hargreaves 2.
Fig. 3 – Scattering diagrams between FAO56PM ETo and the best four models using ISRO data: Ritchie, Irmak 1, Irmak 3 and
Blaney-Criddle.
Fig. 4 – Scattering diagrams between FAO56PM ETo and the best four ANFIS models using NASA data.
and transducers but also by the data acquisition system and this work, a local sensitivity analysis demonstrates how each
the recording process. In order to show the error effects on parameter error contributes to the ETo estimation error when
the output estimation a sensitivity analysis is introduced. In the rest of the parameters were not affected.
Fig. 5 – Scattering diagrams between FAO56PM ETo and the best four ANFIS models using ISRO data.
Table 3 – Ranking of empirical models for daily estimation of ETo using NASA data.
Ranking Models Mean ETo SD(ETo) RMSD MAE SEE d r Regression equation
1 Penman-Monteith 3.9853 1.3048 – – – – – –

2 Ritchie 3.8583 0.9920 0.5617 0.3665 0.3454 0.9411 0.9374 0.687 . x + 1.122
3 Baier-Robertson 4.2084 1.0046 0.7041 0.5544 0.4755 0.9075 0.8810 0.653 . x + 1.604
4 Priestley-Taylor 4.3009 0.2514 0.7049 0.5768 0.5808 0.9246 0.8859 0.818 . x + 1.039
5 Hargreaves 2 4.0832 1.0361 0.7209 0.5725 0.5387 0.9041 0.8543 0.653 . x + 1.479
6 Irmak 1 4.0008 0.7140 0.7425 0.5572 0.2678 0.8670 0.9270 0.489 . x + 2.053
7 Hargreaves 1 4.3003 0.8946 0.8122 0.6435 0.4628 0.8661 0.8559 0.565 . x + 2.048
8 Irmak 2 3.3870 0.7792 0.9283 0.6245 0.3091 0.8212 0.9180 0.528 . x + 1.282
9 Irmak 3 3.5608 0.6564 0.9569 0.6280 0.3348 0.7746 0.8602 0.417 . x + 1.899
Table 4 – Ranking of empirical models for daily estimation of ETo using ISRO data.
Ranking Models Mean ETo SD(ETo) RMSD MAE SEE d r Regression equation
1 Penman-Monteith 6.1608 0.8878 – – – – – –

2 Ritchie 6.1078 0.5627 0.5073 0.3557 0.2958 0.8697 0.8508 0.539 . + 2.785
3 Irmak 1 5.7728 0.3685 0.7165 0.5059 0.1898 0.7079 0.8572 0.356 . + 3.581
4 Irmak 3 5.5409 0.3687 0.8674 0.5178 0.1949 0.6665 0.8490 0.353 . + 3.369
5 Blaney-Criddle 5.8057 0.9648 0.9089 0.5581 0.7760 0.7300 0.5946 0.646 . + 1.825
6 Priestley-Taylor 6.7542 0.8006 0.9373 0.7522 0.6188 0.7082 0.6349 0.573 . + 3.227
Table 5 – Ranking of ANFIS models for daily estimation of ETo using ISRO data (with epoch = 100).
Ranking Models Mean ETo SD(ETo) RMSD MAE SEE d r MF Num Regression equation
MFs
1 Penman-Monteith 6.1608 0.8878 – – – – – – – –

2 ANFIS 11 5.9664 0.7422 0.0016 0.0008 0.0016 0.9999 0.9999 gbellmf 2 1.000 . x – 0.001
3 ANFIS 8 5.9735 0.7573 0.1203 0.0923 0.1203 0.9935 0.9873 gaussmf 2 1.008 . x – 0.038
4 ANFIS 7 5.9764 0.7271 0.1491 0.0992 0.1462 0.9896 0.9796 gaussmf 2 0.960 . x + 0.249
5 ANFIS 10 5.9638 0.6960 0.3039 0.2032 0.2853 0.9534 0.9124 gbellmf 2 0.856 . x + 0.858
6 ANFIS 1 6.0405 0.7880 0.3119 0.2265 0.3034 0.9572 0.9231 gbellmf 2 0.980 . x + 0.192
7 ANFIS 5 5.9699 0.6443 0.3229 0.2187 0.2803 0.9432 0.9007 gbellmf 2 0.782 . x + 1.304
8 ANFIS 9 5.9545 0.6828 0.3634 0.2561 0.3336 0.9309 0.8729 gaussmf 2 0.808 . x + 1.128
9 ANFIS 4 6.0190 0.6729 0.3679 0.2799 0.3302 0.9284 0.8717 trimf 2 0.803 . x + 1.215
10 ANFIS 2 5.9571 0.6634 0.3895 0.2831 0.3479 0.9176 0.8519 trimf 2 0.778 . x + 1.297
11 ANFIS 6 6.0208 0.6265 0.5146 0.4025 0.4275 0.8429 0.7320 gaussmf 2 0.634 . x + 2.231
12 ANFIS 3 3.2345 0.6172 0.5423 0.3871 0.4439 0.8208 0.6957 gbellmf 3 0.566 . x + 2.579
Table 6 – Ranking of ANFIS models for daily estimation of ETo using NASA data (with epoch = 100).
Ranking Models Mean ETo SD(ETo) RMSD MAE SEE d r MF Num Regression equation
MFs
1 Penman-Monteith 3.9853 1.3545 – – – – – – – –

2 ANFIS 11 3.9181 1.1994 0.0618 0.0468 0.0619 0.9993 0.9987 trimf 2 1.003 . x – 0.016
3 ANFIS 10 3.9541 1.1870 0.1923 0.1441 0.1876 0.9934 0.9875 gbellmf 2 0.981 . x + 0.113
4 ANFIS 8 3.9594 1.2829 0.2107 0.1480 0.1931 0.9927 0.9886 gaussmf 2 1.063 . x – 0.120
5 ANFIS 5 3.9874 1.2521 0.2363 0.1755 0.2227 0.9906 0.9841 gaussmf 3 1.036 . x – 0.070
6 ANFIS 4 3.8272 1.1543 0.3121 0.2325 0.2899 0.9821 0.9680 trimf 3 0.930 . x + 0.185
7 ANFIS 7 3.8065 1.1273 0.3360 0.2491 0.2998 0.9787 0.9641 trimf 2 0.941 . x + 0.107
8 ANFIS 1 3.8974 1.2394 0.3385 0.2594 0.3389 0.9803 0.9620 gaussmf 3 1.001 . x – 0.030
9 ANFIS 9 4.0269 0.9527 0.6064 0.4422 0.4718 0.9163 0.8692 trimf 2 0.676 . x + 1.343
10 ANFIS 3 4.0263 0.9946 0.6277 0.4586 0.5153 0.9141 0.8558 gbellmf 3 0.716 . x + 1.211
11 ANFIS 6 4.1527 0.9659 0.7047 0.5336 0.5376 0.8872 0.8313 gaussmf 3 0.666 . x + 1.532
12 ANFIS 2 3.7957 0.6513 1.0197 0.7746 0.5534 0.6415 0.5291 trimf 3 0.279 . x + 2.715
ðEToerror EToÞ produced the best results also for NASA data set, ANFIS 11 (al-
Relative change in ETo ¼ x100 ð6Þ
ETo ready described) and ANFIS 10 with three inputs (solar radia-
tion, temperature and relative humidity) are the best two
3. Results and discussion models. ANFIS 5 is the best model with only two inputs (solar
radiation and relative humidity).
With the results obtained from each model, the performance With these results it is possible to observe that the models
indicators were calculated and the best models were selected. based on radiation have a better performance than those
Figs. 2–5 represent the scattering diagrams between based on temperature. This is the case of the methods:
FAO56PM ETo and the best models. The first two figures refer Ritchie, Irmak and Priestley-Taylor. Also, the models based
to empirical models and the last two to ANFIS models. on temperature that presented better results were: Blaney-
Tables 3 and 4 show the best empirical models. In the case Criddle, Baier-Robertson and Hargreaves 2.
of NASA, the best model is RITCHIE with RMSD = 0.562 and On the other hand, the ANFIS models presented good
r = 0.937, followed by BAIER-ROBERTSON with RMSD = 0.704 results with low values of RMSD and with correlation coeffi-
and r = 0.881 and PRIESTLEY-TAYLOR with RMSD = 0.705 cients very close to the unit. In this sense, it is important to
and r = 0.886 in the third place. In the case of ISRO, RITCHIE emphasize that these models do not present good results
is also the best model with RMSD = 0.507 and r = 0.851, fol- with input variables that have not been previously analyzed.
lowed by IRMAK 1 with RMSD = 0.717 and r = 0.857 and IRMAK For this reason, it is necessary for this method to use a large
3 with RMSD = 0.867 and r = 0.849 in the third place. amount of information for the training of these models.
Tables 5 and 6 present the results for the case of ANFIS To make a complete comparison between empirical and
models. In the case of ISRO, the best model is ANFIS 11 with ANFIS models a local sensitivity analysis was performed.
RMSD = 0.002 and r = 0.999, the best model with three vari- Figs. 6–8 show the mean relative change in ETo estimation
ables (Solar radiation, Wind speed and Relative humidity) is when applying a wide range of relative error on the input
ANFIS 8 with RMSD = 0.121 and r = 0.987 and the best model parameters. There is an input error variation between 30%
with only two variables (Solar radiation and Wind speed) is and +30% that was applied to each input parameter sepa-
the ANFIS 1 with RMSD = 0.312 and r = 0.923. In the case of rately. The results show that empirical models are more lin-
NASA, the best model is ANFIS 11 with RMSD = 0.062 and ear than ANFIS models and present lower fluctuations when
r = 0.999, the best model with three variables (Solar radiation, increasing the error rates.
Temperature and Relative humidity) is ANFIS 10 with In this section, some results were introduced and it is pos-
RMSD = 0.192 and r = 0.987 and the best model with only sible to make a comparison between empirical and ANFIS
two variables (Solar radiation and Relative humidity) is the models. It is seen from scattering diagrams, Figs. 2–5, that
ANFIS 5 with RMSD = 0.236 and r = 0.984. ANFIS models follow better the FAO56PM ETo and produce a
In the case of information obtained from the NASA web- higher correlation coefficient (R), 0.99 against 0.94, respec-
site, the ranking of the three best models is: Ritchie, Baier- tively. Additionally, statistical indicators demonstrate better
Robertson and Hargreaves 2, the first based on radiation and performance for ANFIS models over empirical models, with
the other two, on temperature. For the information obtained RMSD values around 0.2 against 0.6, respectively. Finally,
in ISRO, the ranking is as follows: Ritchie, Irmak 1 and Irmak Figs. 6–8 present a sensitivity analysis and demonstrate that
3 (see in Table 7). empirical models have a better performance than ANFIS
For ISRO data set, the ANFIS methods present better models.
results than the empirical models. Even though ANFIS 11 In [15] a similar analysis was performed for a semi-arid
model with four inputs (solar radiation, wind speed, temper- region in Iran and similar indicators were obtained, in which
ature and relative humidity) turns out to be the best one, it it was concluded that ANFIS models gave better ETo esti-
requires more inputs. ANFIS 8 with three inputs (solar radia- mates. Moreover, in [37] both methods were used for ETo esti-
tion, wind speed and relative humidity) is the second-best mates in a coastal Mediterranean climate and it was observed
model (see in Table 7). With only two inputs (solar radiation that ANFIS models show better results than empirical mod-
and wind speed) the best model is ANFIS 1. ANFIS methods els. In [38], it was presented a similar study for a semi-arid
Table 7 – Resume of best results for each data set.

Ranking Data set Empirical models ANFIS models
Name RMSD r Inputs Name RMSD r Inputs
1 ISRO Ritchie 0.5073 0.8508 RS, TMAX, TMIN ANFIS 11 0.0016 0.9999 RS, T, U2, RH
NASA 0.5617 0.9374 0.0618 0.9987
2 ISRO Irmak 1 0.7165 0.8572 RS, T ANFIS 8 0.1203 0.9873 RS, U2, RH
NASA Baier-Robertson 0.7041 0.8810 TMAX, TMIN ANFIS 10 0.1923 0.9875 RS, T, RH
3 ISRO Irmak 3 0.8674 0.8490 RS, TMAX, TMIN ANFIS 7 0.1491 0.9796 RS, U2, T
NASA Priestley-Taylor 0.7049 0.8859 RS, T, TMAX, TMIN ANFIS 8 0.2107 0.9886 RS, U2, RH
4 ISRO Blaney-Criddle 0.9089 0.5946 RS, T, RH ANFIS 10 0.3039 0.9124 RS, T, RH
NASA Hargreaves 2 0.7209 0.8543 T, TMAX, TMIN ANFIS 5 0.2363 0.9841 RS, RH
Fig. 6 – Relative change in empirical models when using ISRO data: temperature and solar radiation.
Fig. 7 – Relative change in ANFIS models when using ISRO data: temperature and solar radiation.
Fig. 8 – Relative change in ANFIS models when using ISRO data: relative humidity and wind speed.
region in Turkey and it was concluded that ANFIS methods NASA – National Aeronautics and Space Administration for
are superior to some empirical methods in estimation of ETo. providing the data.
4. Conclusion
R E F E R E N C E S
This work performed an analysis of different equations for
the estimation of ETo values of crops in the Coimbatore
region. To achieve this goal, two different statistical records [1] Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M, et al. Crop
were chosen for the same place to work: one from ISRO and evapotranspiration - Guidelines for computing crop water
the other from NASA. These data cover a time span of four requirements - FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. FAO,
Rome 1998;300(9):D05109.
full years between 2012 and 2015.
[2] Pandey PK, Dabral PP, Pandey V. Evaluation of reference
First, the different empirical models of ETo estimation
evapotranspiration methods for the northeastern region of
were presented. The recommended equation for this purpose, India. Int Soil Water Conservation Res 2016;4(1):52–63.
FAO Penman-Monteith, was used as the reference standard to [3] George BA, Raghuwanshi NS. Inter-comparison of reference
carry out the analysis and comparison of the different mod- evapotranspiration estimated using six methods with data. J
els. At the same time, different statistical indicators were Indian Water Resour Soc 2012;32(3):15–22.
elaborated that facilitated the elaboration of a ranking of [4] Nandagiri L, Kovoor GM. Performance evaluation of reference
evapotranspiration equations across a range of Indian
equations.
climates. J Irrig Drain Eng 2006;132(3):238–49.
Secondly, this work performs an analysis of a predictive [5] Khedkar DD, Singh PK. Comparative study for estimation of
estimation method, called ANFIS. Models based on this tech- evapotranspiration using climate based models.
nique are not derivations of empirical equations but depend Contemporary research in India (ISSN 2331-2137). 2018; 4: 5–
on a statistical record of historical values. For the application 9.
of these models, the most important thing is to have an abun- [6] Poyen FB, Kundu P, Ghosh AK. Temperature based ET method
dant data history. This allows the model to ‘‘learn” from past selection for Burdwan District in WB, INDIA. Int J Appl Eng
Res 2018;13(16):12753–63.
values and then estimate what the current value would be.
[7] Trajkovic S, Kolakovic S. Evaluation of reference
Also, a ranking was elaborated for this second case of analysis evapotranspiration equations under humid conditions.
with different models. Water Resour Manage 2009;23(14):3057–67.
The results showed that radiation-based models achieve [8] Xu J, Peng S, Ding J, Wei Q, Yu Y. Evaluation and calibration of
better results than temperature-based models. In this sense, simple methods for daily reference evapotranspiration
the methods that stand out most are Ritchie, Priestley-Taylor estimation in humid East China. Arch Agron Soil Sci 2013;59
(6):845–58.
and Irmak 1. On the other hand, the ANFIS models achieve sat-
[9] Tabari H, Grismer ME, Trajkovic S. Comparative analysis of 31
isfactory results. Also, in this case, the models based on radia-
reference evapotranspiration methods under humid
tion above those based on temperature predominate. conditions. Irrig Sci 2013;31(2):107–17.
Additionally, a local sensitivity analysis was performed for [10] Akhavan S, Kanani E, Dehghanisanij H. Assessment of
the best empirical and ANFIS models. It was observed that different reference evapotranspiration models to estimate
empirical models present lower fluctuations when increasing the actual evapotranspiration of corn (Zea mays L.) in a
the error rates. This is because ANFIS estimation works with semiarid region (case study, Karaj, Iran). Theor Appl Climatol
2019;137(1–2):1403–19.
the learning of previous data. When the input errors are large
[11] Li M, Chu R, Islam ARM, Shen S. Reference
then input parameters move outside the normal values and evapotranspiration variation analysis and its approaches
the ANFIS estimation introduces a wrong output value that evaluation of 13 empirical models in sub-humid and humid
could be traduced into a fluctuation. regions: a case study of the Huai river basin, eastern China.
In conclusion, this work manages to make a broad analysis Water 2018;10(4):493.
of different estimation models of ETo for a semi-arid region in [12] Djaman K, O’Neill M, Diop L, Bodian A, Allen S, Koudahe K,
southeastern India. In addition, it allows determining the et al. Evaluation of the Penman-Monteith and other 34
reference evapotranspiration equations under limited data in
Ritchie model as the one that best adapts to the region.
a semiarid dry climate. Theor Appl Climatol 2019;137(1–
Finally, it leaves relevant results for the use of ANFIS predic- 2):729–43.
tive models in the estimation of this important parameter [13] Bchir A, Lemeur R, Mariem FB, Boukherissa N, Gariani W,
in the design of crop irrigation systems. Sbaii H, et al. Estimation and comparison of reference
evapotranspiration using different methods to determine
olive trees irrigation schedule in different bioclimatic stages
Declaration of Competing Interest
of Tunisia. Brazilian J Biol Sci 2019;6(14):615–28.
[14] Ünesß F, Doğan S, Tasßar B, Kaya Y, Demirci M. The evaluation
The authors declare that they have no known competing and comparison of daily reference evapotranspiration with
financial interests or personal relationships that could have ANN and empirical methods. Nat Eng Sci 2018;3(3):54–64.
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. [15] Tabari H, Kisi O, Ezani A, Talaee PH. SVM, ANFIS, regression
and climate based models for reference evapotranspiration
modelling using limited climatic data in a semi-arid highland
Acknowledgement environment. J Hydrol 2012;444:78–89.
[16] Kisi O, Zounemat-Kermani M. Comparison of two different
The authors wish to express their gratitude to the ISRO Tri- adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference systems in modelling daily
vandrum – Indian Space Research Organization, and the
reference evapotranspiration. Water Resour Manage 2014;28 [26] Jones JW, Ritchie JT. Crop growth models. In: Management of
(9):2655–75. Farm Irrigation Systems. USA: American Society of
[17] Patil AP, Deka PC. An extreme learning machine approach for Agricultural Engineers; 1990. p. 63–89.
modeling evapotranspiration using extrinsic inputs. Comput [27] Jensen ME, Burman RD, Allen RG, editors. Evapotranspiration
Electron Agric 2016;121:385–92. and irrigation water requirements. ASCE manuals and
[18] Granata F. Evapotranspiration evaluation models based on reports on engineering practices No. 70. USA: American
machine learning algorithms—A comparative study. Agric Society of Civil Engineers; 1990.
Water Manag 2019;217:303–15. [28] Turc L. Evaluation des besoins en eau d’irrigation,
[19] Tao H, Diop L, Bodian A, Djaman K, Ndiaye PM, Yaseen ZM. evapotranspiration potentielle, formule climatique simplifice
Reference evapotranspiration prediction using hybridized et mise a jour. (in French). Ann Agron 1961;12:13–49.
fuzzy model with firefly algorithm: Regional case study in [29] Trajkovic S, Kolakovic S. Wind-adjusted Turc equation for
Burkina Faso. Agric Water Manag 2018;208:140–51. estimating reference evapotranspiration at humid European
[20] Biazar SM, Dinpashoh Y, Singh VP. Sensitivity analysis of the locations. Hydrol Res 2009;40(1):45–52.
reference crop evapotranspiration in a humid region. Environ [30] Makkink GF. Testing the Penman formula by means of
Sci Pollut Res 2019;26(31):32517–44. lysimeters. J Inst Water Eng 1957;11:277–88.
[21] Jerszurki D, de Souza JLM, Silva LDCR. Sensitivity of ASCE- [31] Priestley CHB, Taylor RJ. On the assessment of surface heat
Penman–Monteith reference evapotranspiration under flux and evaporation using large-scale parameters. Mon
different climate types in Brazil. Clim Dyn 2019;53(1– Weather Rev 1972;100(2):81–92.
2):943–56. [32] Doorenbos J, Pruitt WO. Guidelines for predicting crop water
[22] Aydın M, Watanabe T, Kapur S. Sensitivity of reference requirements. Rome (Italy): Tech. rept. FAO; 1977.
evapotranspiration and soil evaporation to climate change in [33] Hargreaves GH, Samani ZA. Reference crop evapotranspiration
the Eastern Mediterranean Region. Climate Change Impacts from temperature. Appl Eng Agric 1985;1(2):96–9.
on Basin Agro-ecosystems. Switzerland: Springer; 2019. p. [34] Droogers P, Allen RG. Estimating reference
295–315. evapotranspiration under inaccurate data conditions.
[23] Caprio JM. The solar thermal unit concept in problems Irrigation Drainage Syst 2002;16(1):33–45.
related to plant development and potential [35] Allen RG, Pruitt WO. Rational use of the FAO Blaney-Criddle
evapotranspiration. In: Lieth H, editor. Phenology and formula. J Irrig Drain Eng 1986;112(2):139–55.
seasonality modeling. ecological studies (analysis and [36] Baier W, Robertson GW. Estimation of latent evaporation
synthesis). Germany: Springer; 1974. p. 353–64. from simple weather observations. Can J Plant Sci 1965;45
[24] Irmak S, Allen RG, Whitty EB. Daily grass and alfalfa- (3):276–84.
reference evapotranspiration estimates and alfalfa-to-grass [37] Kisi O, Ozturk O. Adaptive neurofuzzy computing technique
evapotranspiration ratios in Florida. J Irrig Drain Eng 2003;129 for evapotranspiration estimation. J Irrig Drain Eng 2007;133
(5):360–70. (4):368–79.
[25] McGuinness JL, Bordne EF. A comparison of lysimeter-derived [38] Citakoglu H, Cobaner M, Haktanir T, Kisi O. Estimation of
potential evapotranspiration with computed values No. 1452. monthly mean reference evapotranspiration in Turkey. Water
USA: Department of Agriculture; 1972. Resour Manage 2014;28(1):99–113.

Modelling The Daily Reference Evapotranspiration in Semi-Arid Region of South India: A Case Study Comparing ANFIS and Empirical Models

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Modelling The Daily Reference Evapotranspiration in Semi-Arid Region of South India: A Case Study Comparing ANFIS and Empirical Models

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Available at www.sciencedirect.

INFORMATION PROCESSING IN AGRICULTURE xxx (xxxx) xxx

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

Modelling the daily reference evapotranspiration in

1. Introduction Radiation models for the region of Maharashtra. In [6] the

Table 2 – ANFIS models using ISRO and NASA data.

ANFIS 1 RS, U2 ISRO Generalized bell-shaped 2 0.312

2.5.3. Standard Error of Estimate (SEE)

It becomes necessary to develop a ranking among all the

2.5.1. Index of Agreement (d)

1 Penman-Monteith 3.9853 1.3048 – – – – – –

1 Penman-Monteith 6.1608 0.8878 – – – – – –

1 Penman-Monteith 6.1608 0.8878 – – – – – – – –

1 Penman-Monteith 3.9853 1.3545 – – – – – – – –

Table 7 – Resume of best results for each data set.

You might also like