Acta Geographica Sinica ›› 2004, Vol. 59 ›› Issue (3): 331-340.doi: 10.11821/xb200403002

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comparison of Different Complementary Relationship Models for Regional Evapotranspiration Estimation

LIU Shaomin1, SUN Rui1, SUN Zhongping1, LI Xiaowen1, LIU Changming2   

  1. 1. Research Center for Remote Sensing and GIS, School of Geography, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China;
    2. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
  • Received:2003-09-05 Revised:2004-03-15 Online:2004-05-25 Published:2004-05-25
  • Supported by:

    Major State Basic Research Development Program of China, No.G2000077908; No.G1999043601; National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.40201038


Based on meteorological and hydrological data in the Yellow River Basin covering 1981-2000, Advection-Aridity model, CRAE model and Granger model were validated at different temporal scales and in different climatic conditions by means of remote sensing and digital elevation model. Different climatic factors' effects on performance of models and variation characteristics of empirical parameters were analysed. Results show that with the exception of several extreme arid years, annual errors of Advection-Aridity model, CRAE model and Granger model were less than 10%. Monthly evapotranspirations from Advection- Aridity model were rational. However, CRAE model and Granger model overestimates monthly evapotranspirations during the winter. Spatial distribution of water balance closure errors for Advection-Aridity model is similar to that of Granger model. The closure errors for Advection-Aridity model and Granger model are less than that of CRAE model. In arid and humid climates or under more and less available energy conditions, Advection-Aridity model, CRAE model and Granger model did not perform very well.

Key words: evapotranspiration, complementary relationship model, water balance, the Yellow River