Lu, J., Sun, G., McNulty, S.G., and Amatya, D.M. (2005) A comparison of six potential evapotranspiration methods for regional use in the southeastern United States. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 41, 621-633.

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Evaluation of alternative methods for estimating reference evapotranspiration

  AUTHORS: Daniel K. Fisher, H. C. Pringle III

  KEYWORDS: Reference Evapotranspiration; FAO-56; Penman-Monteith; Turc; Hargreaves; Reduced Set; Irrigation Scheduling

  JOURNAL NAME: Agricultural Sciences, Vol.4 No.8A, August 30, 2013

  ABSTRACT: Evapotranspiration is an important component in water-balance and irrigation scheduling models. While the FAO-56 Penman-Monteith method has become the de facto standard for estimating reference evapotranspiration (ETo), it is a complex method requiring several weather parameters. Required weather data are oftentimes unavailable, and alternative methods must be used. Three alternative ETo methods, the FAO-56 Reduced Set, Hargreaves, and Turc methods, were evaluated for use in Mississippi, a humid region of the USA, using only measurements of air temperature. The Turc equation, developed for use with measured temperature and solar radiation, was tested with estimated radiation and found to provide better estimates of FAO-56 ETo than the other methods. Mean bias errors of 0.75, 0.28, and -0.19 mm, mean absolute errors of 0.92, 0.68, and 0.62 mm, and percent errors of 22.5%, 8.5%, and -5.7% were found for daily estimates for the FAO-56 Reduced Set, Hargreaves, and Turc methods, respectively.