Performance analyses of effective rainfall estimation methods for accurate quantification of agricultural water footprint

Muratoglu A., Bilgen G. K., ANGIN İ., Kodal S.

Water Research, cilt.238, 2023 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 238
  • Basım Tarihi: 2023
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.watres.2023.120011
  • Dergi Adı: Water Research
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, PASCAL, Aerospace Database, Analytical Abstracts, Applied Science & Technology Source, Aqualine, Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA), BIOSIS, Biotechnology Research Abstracts, CAB Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts Core, Chimica, Communication Abstracts, Compendex, Computer & Applied Sciences, EMBASE, Environment Index, Food Science & Technology Abstracts, Geobase, MEDLINE, Metadex, Pollution Abstracts, Veterinary Science Database, Civil Engineering Abstracts
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: CROPWAT, Effective rainfall, Soil water balance, SuET, US-BR, USDA-SCS
  • Ankara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Water footprint (WF) assessments have become a significant tool for the sustainable management in recent years. Effective rainfall (Peff) is a critical indicator for characterizing soil moisture (green water, WFgreen) and calculating irrigation requirements (blue water, WFblue). However, majority of the water footprint analyses employ empirical or numerical models to predict Peff, and the number of studies for experimental validation of these models are quite insufficient. The main scope of this study is to test the performance of commonly used Peff estimation models in relation to the soil water balance (SWB) of an experimental site. Accordingly, the daily and monthly soil water budget is estimated from a maize field which is characterized as semi-arid land with continental climate (Ankara, Turkey), equipped with moisture sensors. Then, Peff, WFgreen, and WFblue parameters are calculated using FP, US-BR, USDA-SCS, FAO/AGLW, CROPWAT, and SuET methods and compared with SWB method. Employed models were highly variable. CROPWAT and US-BR predictions were the most accurate. In majority of months, the CROPWAT method estimated the Peff with a maximum deviation of 5% from the SWB method. In addition, the CROPWAT method predicted blue WF with an error less than 1%. The widely utilized USDA-SCS approach did not produce expected results. The FAO-AGLW method provided the lowest performance for each parameter. We also find that the errors in estimating Peff in semi-arid conditions cause green and blue WF outputs to be quite less accurate than the dry and humid cases. This study provides one of the most detailed assessments about the impact of effective rainfall on the blue and green WF results with high temporal resolution. The findings of this study are important for the accuracy and performance of the formulae used in Peff estimations and to develop more precise blue and green WF analyses in the future.