| Autor: |
Purnadurga, G.1 (AUTHOR), Kumar, T.V. Lakshmi1 (AUTHOR) lkumarap@hotmail.com, Rao, K. Koteswara2 (AUTHOR), Barbosa, Humberto3 (AUTHOR), Mall, R.K.4 (AUTHOR) |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
International Journal of Climatology. 12/1/2019, Vol. 39 Issue 15, p5791-5800. 10p. |
| Abstrakt: |
In this study, we have computed the evapotranspiration (ET) from the input variables of India Meteorological Department (IMD) for different stations in Monsoon Core Region (MCR) of India and Indian Peninsular Region (IPR) and compared with the ERA Interim (ERA‐I) and CRU ET data sets. While studying the discrepancies among the data sets, rainfall (source: IMD gridded), relative humidity (source: ERA Interim gridded), air temperature (source: IMD gridded) and soil moisture (source: TRMM/LPRM/TMI‐Model) were made use to illustrate the ET variations. When compared with IMD ET, our results show the CRU ET is underestimated but maintained the close pattern over MCR and IPR during South West (SW) monsoon (June–September) and North East (NE) monsoon (October–December) period, respectively. ERA‐I ET bounded to have mixed response over MCR and are higher than the IMD ET over IPR. Daily comparison of the IMD and ERA‐I ET data sets shows a large bias during the beginning of SW monsoon (June month) compared to other months. Site wise correlations show the substantial positive correlations between IMD and CRU ET over MCR than IPR. Overall analysis shows the monsoon features were better explained by the variations in IMD ET compared to CRU and ERA‐I ET data sets. The reported disparities among the data sets play an important role in the choice of selection for different applications such as water resource assessments, crop water requirements, monitoring of droughts etc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
GreenFILE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text