IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v95y2008i10p1153-1160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Water use assessment in muskmelon by the Penman-Monteith "one-step" approach

Author

Listed:
  • Lovelli, S.
  • Perniola, M.
  • Arcieri, M.
  • Rivelli, A.R.
  • Di Tommaso, T.

Abstract

The use of the "one-step" approach of Penman-Monteith (P-M) to assess crop water use has its limit in the lack of user friendly methodologies for a daily assessment of crop canopy resistance, rc. The model proposed by Monteith [Monteith, J.L., 1965. Evaporation and environment. In: Fogg, G.E. (Ed.), The State and Movement of Water in Living Organism. Soc. Exp. Biol. Symp. 19, 205-234] to estimate rc (rc = 100/LAI), although it is simple, requires the knowledge of LAI value during growing cycle. This work aims to propose an easy-to-use methodology for irrigation scheduling, to assess the values LAI gets during the growing cycle and thus for canopy resistance assessment. In muskmelon crop, grown with and without plastic film mulching, canopy resistance was measured by P-M formula inversion, clarifying the unknown resistivity term, being crop evapotranspiration known by lysimeter-based measurements. Measured canopy resistance was compared with the one estimated by Monteith model (1965), both in its original version and in the form we simplified in terms of LAI value during crop cycle. Thus, we compared the evapotranspiration assessed by the "one-step" use of P-M equation, with those estimated by the classical "two-step" approach, using crop coefficients, and with that directly measured by lysimeters. In particular in the mulched crop the "one-step" approach of P-M overestimates water use only by 4%, while the "two steps" approach underestimates water use by 17%. Despite both the methodologies proposed for LAI calculation and the Monteith model to assess canopy resistance extremely simplify more complex processes, they were able to give a good accuracy to assess muskmelon water use by the P-M "one-step" equation. Comparing the "one-step" and the more used "two-step" approaches it came out that, despite the latter is better correlated to the data measured by a lysimeter, it does not achieve a more accurate assessment compared to the "one-step" approach; in particular, in the mulched crop, the "two-step" approach significantly underestimates water use, while its estimation is reliable with the "one-step" approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Lovelli, S. & Perniola, M. & Arcieri, M. & Rivelli, A.R. & Di Tommaso, T., 2008. "Water use assessment in muskmelon by the Penman-Monteith "one-step" approach," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(10), pages 1153-1160, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:95:y:2008:i:10:p:1153-1160
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378-3774(08)00110-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lovelli, S. & Pizza, S. & Caponio, T. & Rivelli, A.R. & Perniola, M., 2005. "Lysimetric determination of muskmelon crop coefficients cultivated under plastic mulches," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 147-159, March.
    2. Alves, Isabel & Santos Pereira, Luis, 2000. "Modelling surface resistance from climatic variables?," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 371-385, January.
    3. McNaughton, K. G. & Jarvis, P. G., 1984. "Using the Penman-Monteith equation predictively," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(1-3), pages 263-278, January.
    4. Allen, Richard G. & Pruitt, William O. & Wright, James L. & Howell, Terry A. & Ventura, Francesca & Snyder, Richard & Itenfisu, Daniel & Steduto, Pasquale & Berengena, Joaquin & Yrisarry, Javier Basel, 2006. "A recommendation on standardized surface resistance for hourly calculation of reference ETo by the FAO56 Penman-Monteith method," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(1-2), pages 1-22, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Traore, Seydou & Wang, Yu-Min & Kerh, Tienfuan, 2010. "Artificial neural network for modeling reference evapotranspiration complex process in Sudano-Sahelian zone," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(5), pages 707-714, May.
    2. Pereira, L.S. & Paredes, P. & Jovanovic, N., 2020. "Soil water balance models for determining crop water and irrigation requirements and irrigation scheduling focusing on the FAO56 method and the dual Kc approach," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    3. Rana, G. & Katerji, N. & Lazzara, P. & Ferrara, R.M., 2012. "Operational determination of daily actual evapotranspiration of irrigated tomato crops under Mediterranean conditions by one-step and two-step models: Multiannual and local evaluations," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 285-296.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bastidas-Obando, E. & Bastiaanssen, W.G.M. & Jarmain, C., 2017. "Estimation of transpiration fluxes from rainfed and irrigated sugarcane in South Africa using a canopy resistance and crop coefficient model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 94-107.
    2. Viktor Dubovský & Dagmar Dlouhá & Lukáš Pospíšil, 2020. "The Calibration of Evaporation Models against the Penman–Monteith Equation on Lake Most," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Rana, G. & Katerji, N. & Lazzara, P. & Ferrara, R.M., 2012. "Operational determination of daily actual evapotranspiration of irrigated tomato crops under Mediterranean conditions by one-step and two-step models: Multiannual and local evaluations," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 285-296.
    4. Pereira, L.S. & Paredes, P. & Jovanovic, N., 2020. "Soil water balance models for determining crop water and irrigation requirements and irrigation scheduling focusing on the FAO56 method and the dual Kc approach," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    5. Shrestha, N.K. & Shukla, S., 2014. "Basal crop coefficients for vine and erect crops with plastic mulch in a sub-tropical region," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 29-37.
    6. Gonçalo C. Rodrigues & Ricardo P. Braga, 2021. "Estimation of Reference Evapotranspiration during the Irrigation Season Using Nine Temperature-Based Methods in a Hot-Summer Mediterranean Climate," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-13, February.
    7. Panagiotis Christias & Ioannis N. Daliakopoulos & Thrassyvoulos Manios & Mariana Mocanu, 2020. "Comparison of Three Computational Approaches for Tree Crop Irrigation Decision Support," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-26, May.
    8. Choudhury, B.U. & Singh, Anil Kumar & Pradhan, S., 2013. "Estimation of crop coefficients of dry-seeded irrigated rice–wheat rotation on raised beds by field water balance method in the Indo-Gangetic plains, India," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 20-31.
    9. Althoff, Daniel & Filgueiras, Roberto & Dias, Santos Henrique Brant & Rodrigues, Lineu Neiva, 2019. "Impact of sum-of-hourly and daily timesteps in the computations of reference evapotranspiration across the Brazilian territory," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    10. Pozníková, Gabriela & Fischer, Milan & van Kesteren, Bram & Orság, Matěj & Hlavinka, Petr & Žalud, Zdeněk & Trnka, Miroslav, 2018. "Quantifying turbulent energy fluxes and evapotranspiration in agricultural field conditions: A comparison of micrometeorological methods," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 249-263.
    11. Pereira, L.S. & Paredes, P. & Melton, F. & Johnson, L. & Mota, M. & Wang, T., 2021. "Prediction of crop coefficients from fraction of ground cover and height: Practical application to vegetable, field and fruit crops with focus on parameterization," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    12. Luis Santos Pereira, 2017. "Water, Agriculture and Food: Challenges and Issues," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(10), pages 2985-2999, August.
    13. Laura Şmuleac & Ciprian Rujescu & Adrian Șmuleac & Florin Imbrea & Isidora Radulov & Dan Manea & Anișoara Ienciu & Tabita Adamov & Raul Pașcalău, 2020. "Impact of Climate Change in the Banat Plain, Western Romania, on the Accessibility of Water for Crop Production in Agriculture," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-24, September.
    14. Cossu, Marco & Cossu, Andrea & Deligios, Paola A. & Ledda, Luigi & Li, Zhi & Fatnassi, Hicham & Poncet, Christine & Yano, Akira, 2018. "Assessment and comparison of the solar radiation distribution inside the main commercial photovoltaic greenhouse types in Europe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 822-834.
    15. Asmamaw, Desale Kidane & Janssens, Pieter & Dessie, Mekete & Tilahun, Seifu A. & Adgo, Enyew & Nyssen, Jan & Walraevens, Kristine & Assaye, Habtamu & Yenehun, Alemu & Nigate, Fenta & Cornelis, Wim M., 2023. "Effect of deficit irrigation and soil fertility management on wheat production and water productivity in the Upper Blue Nile Basin, Ethiopia," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    16. Consoli, S. & Stagno, F. & Roccuzzo, G. & Cirelli, G.L. & Intrigliolo, F., 2014. "Sustainable management of limited water resources in a young orange orchard," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 60-68.
    17. Cécile Couharde & Rémi Generoso, 2023. "The financial cost of stabilizing US farm income under climate change," Working Papers hal-04159823, HAL.
    18. Xing, Liwen & Zhao, Lu & Cui, Ningbo & Liu, Chunwei & Guo, Li & Du, Taisheng & Wu, Zongjun & Gong, Daozhi & Jiang, Shouzheng, 2023. "Apple tree transpiration estimated using the Penman-Monteith model integrated with optimized jarvis model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    19. Noemi Mancosu & Donatella Spano & Morteza Orang & Sara Sarreshteh & Richard Snyder, 2016. "SIMETAW# - a Model for Agricultural Water Demand Planning," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(2), pages 541-557, January.
    20. Widmoser, Peter, 2009. "A discussion on and alternative to the Penman-Monteith equation," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(4), pages 711-721, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:95:y:2008:i:10:p:1153-1160. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.