NASA Power和地面气象站在不同气候条件下的参考蒸散发估算数据

IF 0.7 4区 农林科学 Q3 AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1590/s1678-3921.pab2023.v58.03261
Stefanie Lais Kreutz Rosa, Jorge Luiz Moretti de Souza, Aline Aparecida dos Santos
{"title":"NASA Power和地面气象站在不同气候条件下的参考蒸散发估算数据","authors":"Stefanie Lais Kreutz Rosa, Jorge Luiz Moretti de Souza, Aline Aparecida dos Santos","doi":"10.1590/s1678-3921.pab2023.v58.03261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The objective of this work was to evaluate the data estimated by NASA Power in relation to that measured at surface weather stations under different climates, and to verify the effects of these data on reference evapotranspiration (ETo) estimation. For comparison, data measured at 21 surface weather stations, located in Brazil, Israel, Australia, Portugal, and the United States of America were used, representing different Köppen climate types. The following climatic variables were analyzed daily: maximum (Tmax), mean (Tmean), and minimum (Tmin) air temperatures; wind speed; incident solar radiation; and mean relative humidity (RHmean). Wind speed showed the highest variations and was overestimated in the Cfb, BWh, BSh, and Cfa climates. Tmean and mean wind speed were estimated accurately in the Csa and BWh climates, whereas Tmax and Tmin were underestimated in 13 and 9 climates, respectively; Tmin did not show adequate results in tropical climates. Incident solar radiation was overestimated in all climates, except in BSh, but presented the best statistical indicators among the analyzed variables. The scenarios in which ETo was estimated using the Penman-Monteith method and data from NASA Power were consistent even for the climate type that presented the worst association between measured and estimated data.","PeriodicalId":19826,"journal":{"name":"Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Data from NASA Power and surface weather stations under different climates on reference evapotranspiration estimation\",\"authors\":\"Stefanie Lais Kreutz Rosa, Jorge Luiz Moretti de Souza, Aline Aparecida dos Santos\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/s1678-3921.pab2023.v58.03261\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The objective of this work was to evaluate the data estimated by NASA Power in relation to that measured at surface weather stations under different climates, and to verify the effects of these data on reference evapotranspiration (ETo) estimation. For comparison, data measured at 21 surface weather stations, located in Brazil, Israel, Australia, Portugal, and the United States of America were used, representing different Köppen climate types. The following climatic variables were analyzed daily: maximum (Tmax), mean (Tmean), and minimum (Tmin) air temperatures; wind speed; incident solar radiation; and mean relative humidity (RHmean). Wind speed showed the highest variations and was overestimated in the Cfb, BWh, BSh, and Cfa climates. Tmean and mean wind speed were estimated accurately in the Csa and BWh climates, whereas Tmax and Tmin were underestimated in 13 and 9 climates, respectively; Tmin did not show adequate results in tropical climates. Incident solar radiation was overestimated in all climates, except in BSh, but presented the best statistical indicators among the analyzed variables. The scenarios in which ETo was estimated using the Penman-Monteith method and data from NASA Power were consistent even for the climate type that presented the worst association between measured and estimated data.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19826,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-3921.pab2023.v58.03261\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-3921.pab2023.v58.03261","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:本研究的目的是将NASA Power估算的数据与不同气候条件下地面气象站的测量数据进行比较,并验证这些数据对参考蒸散发(ETo)估算的影响。为了进行比较,使用了位于巴西、以色列、澳大利亚、葡萄牙和美利坚合众国的21个地面气象站测量的数据,代表了不同的Köppen气候类型。每日分析以下气候变量:最高气温(Tmax)、平均气温(Tmean)和最低气温(Tmin);风速;入射太阳辐射;和平均相对湿度(RHmean)。风速在Cfb、BWh、BSh和Cfa气候中变化最大,且被高估。平均风速和平均风速在Csa和BWh气候中被准确估计,而Tmax和Tmin分别在13个和9个气候中被低估;Tmin在热带气候中没有显示出足够的效果。除BSh外,所有气候条件下的太阳入射辐射均被高估,但在各分析变量中表现出最好的统计指标。使用Penman-Monteith方法估算的ETo情景和来自NASA Power的数据是一致的,甚至对于在测量数据和估算数据之间表现出最坏关联的气候类型也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Data from NASA Power and surface weather stations under different climates on reference evapotranspiration estimation
Abstract The objective of this work was to evaluate the data estimated by NASA Power in relation to that measured at surface weather stations under different climates, and to verify the effects of these data on reference evapotranspiration (ETo) estimation. For comparison, data measured at 21 surface weather stations, located in Brazil, Israel, Australia, Portugal, and the United States of America were used, representing different Köppen climate types. The following climatic variables were analyzed daily: maximum (Tmax), mean (Tmean), and minimum (Tmin) air temperatures; wind speed; incident solar radiation; and mean relative humidity (RHmean). Wind speed showed the highest variations and was overestimated in the Cfb, BWh, BSh, and Cfa climates. Tmean and mean wind speed were estimated accurately in the Csa and BWh climates, whereas Tmax and Tmin were underestimated in 13 and 9 climates, respectively; Tmin did not show adequate results in tropical climates. Incident solar radiation was overestimated in all climates, except in BSh, but presented the best statistical indicators among the analyzed variables. The scenarios in which ETo was estimated using the Penman-Monteith method and data from NASA Power were consistent even for the climate type that presented the worst association between measured and estimated data.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira
Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira 农林科学-农业综合
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
审稿时长
9-18 weeks
期刊介绍: Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira – PAB – is issued monthly by Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária – EMBRAPA, affiliated to Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply. PAB publishes original scientific-technological articles on Plant Physiology, Plant Pathology, Crop Science, Genetics, Soil Science, Food Technology and Animal Science. Its abbreviated title is Pesq. agropec. bras., and it should be used in bibliographies, footnotes, references and bibliographic strips.
期刊最新文献
Correlation between carbon isotopic composition and morphological, micromorphological, anatomical, and physiological traits in rice Potential use of sweet potato leaves for human consumption Storability of 'SCS417 Monalisa' apple as affected by harvest maturity, 1-methylcyclopropene treatment, and storage atmosphere Drought tolerance induced by the overexpression of the nuclear rbcL gene in rice Magnesium thermophosphates from the Maicuru complex as sources of P and Mg in maize production
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1