Study of Different Evapotranspiration Models under Polyhouse and Open Environment in Tarai Region of Uttarakhand

Main Article Content

Atish Sagar
Pramodh Kumar Singh

Abstract

The average of mean monthly ET0 estimated under polyhouse by FAO PM (benchmark) model was 39.44 mm, but that of the FAO Penman, Hargreaves Stanghellini, Priestley-Taylor and FAO Radiation models were 38.37, 18.18, 37.80, 48.17 and 53.87 mm respectively. Whereas, the average of mean monthly ETo estimated under open environment by FAO PM (benchmark) model was 116.34 mm, but that of the FAO Penman, Hargreaves Stanghellini, Priestley-Taylor and FAO Radiation models were 119.33, 133, 126.41, 113.17 and 117.37 mm respectively. The FAO Penman and Hargreaves model are found to be most and least appropriate models for estimating daily ET0 under polyhouse. Whereas, FAO Radiation and Stanghellini model observed to be most and the least appropriate models in an open environment for estimating daily ET0 under polyhouse for the Pantnagar Tarai condition of Uttarakhand.

Keywords:
Reference evapotranspiration models, performance regression statistics, polyhouse, open environment, Uttarakhand

Article Details

How to Cite
Sagar, A., & Singh, P. K. (2019). Study of Different Evapotranspiration Models under Polyhouse and Open Environment in Tarai Region of Uttarakhand. International Journal of Environment and Climate Change, 9(12), 832-840. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijecc/2019/v9i1230164
Section
Original Research Article

References

Islam MT. Effect of temperature on photosynthesis, yield attributes and yield of tomato genotypes. Int. J. Expt. Agric. 2011;2(1):8-11.

Legates DR, McCabe GJ. Evaluating the use of “goodness of fit” measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation. Water Resour. Res. 1999;35(1): 233-241.

Medina CL, Souza RP, Machado EC, Ribeiro RV, Silva JA. Photosynthetic response of citrus grown under reflective aluminized polypropylene shading nets. Scientia Horticulturae. 2002;1-11.

McMahon TA, Finlayson BL, Peel MC. Historical developments of models for estimating evaporation using standard meteorological data. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water. 2016;3(6):788-818.

Moazed H, Ghaemi AA, Rafiee MR. Evaluation of several reference evapotranspiration methods: A comparitive study of greenhouse and outdoor conditions. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology. Transactions of Civil Engineering. 2014;38(C2):421.

Guerrero F, Kacira M, Fitz-Rodríguez E, Kubota C, Giacomelli GA, Linker R, Arbel A. Comparison of three evapotranspiration models for a greenhouse cooling strategy with natural ventilation and variable high pressure fogging. Scientia Horticulturae. 2012;134:210-221.

Sagar A, Singh PK. Evapotranspiration based micro irrigation scheduling of tomato crop under naturally ventilated polyhouse. Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology. 2019;5:1-7.

Gomez H, Ortega-Farías S, Argote M. Evaluation of water requirements for a greenhouse tomato crop using the Priestley-Taylor method. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research. 2009;69(1):3-11.

Orgaz F, Fernández MD, Bonachela S, Gallardo M, Fereres E. Evapotranspiration of horticultural crops in an unheated plastic greenhouse. Agricultural Water Management. 2005;72(2):81-96.

Fazlil-Ilahil WF. Evapotranspiration models in greenhouse. Doctoral Dissertation, M. Sc. Thesis. Wageningen Agricultural University, The Netherlands; 2009.

Hurd RG, Graves CJ. The influence of different temperature patterns having the same integral on the earliness and yield of tomatoes. Acta Horticulturae. 1984;148: 547-554.

Djaman K, Koudahe K, Akinbile CO, Irmak S. Evaluation of eleven reference evapotranspiration models in semiarid conditions. Journal of Water Resource and Protection. 2017;9(12):1469.

Mpusia PTO. Comparison of water consumption between greenhouse and outdoor cultivation. Enschede: ITC; 2006.

Gupta AJ, Ahmed N, Bhatt FN, Chattoo MA. Production of hybrid tomato for higher income under drip irrigation and fertigation in Kashmir valley. Indian Journal of Horticulture. 2010;67(1):127-131.