U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 close



Research
                Research Home
                            National Programs
                            Research Projects
                            Scientific Manuscripts
                            International Engagement
                            Scientific Software/Models
                            Databases and Datasets
                            Office of Scientific Quality Review
            Media
                News & Features
                            Multimedia
                            Briefing Room
                            Down on the Farm
                            Press Room
                            Science in Your Shopping Cart
                            Scientific Discoveries
                            Tellus
                            Under the Microscope
            About ARS
                About ARS Home
                            Staff Directory
                            Labs and Research Centers (Map)
                            Headquarter Offices
                            Organizational Chart
                            Employee Services (REE Employees Only)
                            Office of Outreach, Diversity, and Equal Opportunity
            Work With Us
                Work With Us Home
                            ARS Vacancies at USAJOBS
                            Careers at ARS Information
                            Scientific Collaborations
                            Extramural Agreements
                            1890 Faculty Research Sabbatical ProgramSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Research Publications at this Location





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications

Title:   Author  item
                                            Alfieri, Josephitem
                                            Kustas, William

                                                         - *Bill*item
                                            Prueger, Johnitem
                                            HIPPS, L - Utah State Universityitem
                                            Evett, Steven

                                                         - *Steve*item
                                            BASARA, J - University Of Oklahomaitem
                                            NEALE, C - Utah State Universityitem
                                            French, Andrewitem
                                            Colaizzi, Paulitem
                                            AGAM, N - Collaboratoritem
                                            CHAVEZ, J - Colorado State Universityitem
                                            Howell, Terry
  Submitted to: Advances in Water Resources
                                    Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
                                    Publication Acceptance Date: 7/6/2012
                                    Publication  Date: 12/1/2012
                                    Citation: Alfieri, J.G., Kustas, W.P., Prueger, J.H., Hipps, L.E., Evett, S.R., Basara, J., Neale, C., French, A.N., Colaizzi, P.D., Agam, N., Chavez, J., Howell, T.A. 2012. On the discrepancy between eddy covariance and lysimetry-based surface flux measurements under strongly advective conditions. Advances in Water Resources. 50:62-78.Interpretive Summary: The task of ensuring there is sufficient water to meet the needs of all end users will become very difficult in the near future as the demand for freshwater increases with a growing population and changing climate. Since irrigation is the largest user of freshwater resources representing between 70% and 80% of total freshwater withdrawals and 90% of consumptive water use globally during the last century, it has become a critical focus of water conservation efforts. Improving the effectiveness of irrigation requires accurate estimates of both the current water needs of the crops and the evaporative losses from the fields. Increasingly, these estimates are obtained using remote sensing-based models particularly when evapotranspiration (ET) estimates are needed on a regional scale. These remote sensing-based methods are typically validated and calibrated using in-situ ET measurements. Although there are a variety of techniques for measuring ET, Eddy Covariance (EC) and Lysimetery (LY) are two of the most common methods used. The EC method determines ET as a function of the covariance between vertical wind speed and water vapor density while LY estimates ET as a function of the change in weight of soil monolith over time. Each of these methods has their own advantages and disadvantages related to their theoretical underpinning and in-field application. Using data collected primarily over a pair of irrigated cotton fields as a part of the Bushland Evapotranspiration and Remote Sensing Experiment (BEAREX08), ET measurements collected with EC and LY systems were compared and substantial differences were found. Daytime mean differences in the ET measurements from the two techniques were found to be in excess of nearly 0.3 mm/hr under strongly advective conditions. Causes for this disparity were related to failure of the EC method to fully balance the surface energy budget,  local advection of warm, dry air over the irrigated cotton fields, and the failure of the LY systems to accurately represent the surface properties of the cotton fields as a whole.  Regardless of the underlying cause, the discrepancy among the ET measurement techniques underscores the difficulty in collecting reliable measurements under strongly advective conditions.  It also raises awareness of the uncertainty associated with in-situ techniques and the need for caution when using such data for model validation.
                                Technical Abstract: Discrepancies can arise among surface flux measurements collected using disparate techniques due to differences in both the instrumentation and theoretical underpinnings of the different measurement methods. Using data collected primarily over a pair of irrigated cotton fields as a part of the Bushland Evapotranspiration and Remote Sensing Experiment (BEAREX08), flux measurements collected with two commonly-used methods, eddy covariance (EC) and lysimetry (LY), were compared and substantial differences were found. Daytime mean differences in the flux measurements from the two techniques were in excess of 200 W/m^2 under strongly advective conditions. Three causes for this disparity were found: (i) the failure of the eddy covariance systems to fully balance the surface energy budget, (ii), flux divergence due to the local advection of warm, dry air over the irrigated cotton fields, and (iii) the failure of lysimeters to accurately represent the surface properties of the cotton fields as a whole.  Regardless of the underlying cause, the discrepancy among the flux measurements underscores the difficulty in collecting these measurements under strongly advective conditions. It also raises awareness of the uncertainty associated with in-situ micrometeorological measurements and the need for caution when using such data for model validation or as observational evidence to definitively support or refute scientific hypotheses.


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov