Articles | Volume 9, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-283-2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-283-2016
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
26 Jan 2016
Methods for assessment of models |  | 26 Jan 2016

The GEWEX LandFlux project: evaluation of model evaporation using tower-based and globally gridded forcing data

M. F. McCabe, A. Ershadi, C. Jimenez, D. G. Miralles, D. Michel, and E. F. Wood

Related authors

Saudi Rainfall (SaRa): Hourly 0.1° Gridded Rainfall (1979–Present) for Saudi Arabia via Machine Learning Fusion of Satellite and Model Data
Xuetong Wang, Raied S. Alharbi, Oscar M. Baez-Villanueva, Amy Green, Matthew F. McCabe, Yoshihide Wada, Albert I. J. M. Van Dijk, Muhammad A. Abid, and Hylke Beck
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-254,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-254, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).
Short summary
GRASS COVER, TREE DENSITY, AND LEAF DEVELOPMENT OF MEDITERRANEAN ORCHARDS FROM HIGH RESOLUTION DATA
P. Rouault, D. Courault, G. Pouget, F. Flamain, R. Lopez-Lozano, C. Doussan, M. Debolini, and M. McCabe
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLVIII-1-W2-2023, 1531–1536, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-1-W2-2023-1531-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-1-W2-2023-1531-2023, 2023
INTRA-FIELD CROP YIELD VARIABILITY BY ASSIMILATING CUBESAT LAI IN THE APSIM CROP MODEL
M. G. Ziliani, M. U. Altaf, B. Aragon, R. Houborg, T. E. Franz, Y. Lu, J. Sheffield, I. Hoteit, and M. F. McCabe
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLIII-B3-2022, 1045–1052, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B3-2022-1045-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B3-2022-1045-2022, 2022
Mapping groundwater abstractions from irrigated agriculture: big data, inverse modeling, and a satellite–model fusion approach
Oliver Miguel López Valencia, Kasper Johansen, Bruno José Luis Aragón Solorio, Ting Li, Rasmus Houborg, Yoann Malbeteau, Samer AlMashharawi, Muhammad Umer Altaf, Essam Mohammed Fallatah, Hari Prasad Dasari, Ibrahim Hoteit, and Matthew Francis McCabe
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 5251–5277, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-5251-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-5251-2020, 2020
Short summary
PREDICTING BIOMASS AND YIELD AT HARVEST OF SALT-STRESSED TOMATO PLANTS USING UAV IMAGERY
K. Johansen, M. J. L. Morton, Y. Malbeteau, B. Aragon, S. Al-Mashharawi, M. Ziliani, Y. Angel, G. Fiene, S. Negrao, M. A. A. Mousa, M. A. Tester, and M. F. McCabe
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLII-2-W13, 407–411, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W13-407-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W13-407-2019, 2019

Related subject area

Hydrology
SERGHEI v2.0: introducing a performance-portable, high-performance, three-dimensional variably saturated subsurface flow solver (SERGHEI-RE)
Zhi Li, Gregor Rickert, Na Zheng, Zhibo Zhang, Ilhan Özgen-Xian, and Daniel Caviedes-Voullième
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 547–562, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-547-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-547-2025, 2025
Short summary
The global water resources and use model WaterGAP v2.2e: description and evaluation of modifications and new features
Hannes Müller Schmied, Tim Trautmann, Sebastian Ackermann, Denise Cáceres, Martina Flörke, Helena Gerdener, Ellen Kynast, Thedini Asali Peiris, Leonie Schiebener, Maike Schumacher, and Petra Döll
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8817–8852, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8817-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8817-2024, 2024
Short summary
Generalised drought index: a novel multi-scale daily approach for drought assessment
João António Martins Careto, Rita Margarida Cardoso, Ana Russo, Daniela Catarina André Lima, and Pedro Miguel Matos Soares
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8115–8139, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8115-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8115-2024, 2024
Short summary
Development and performance of a high-resolution surface wave and storm surge forecast model: application to a large lake
Laura L. Swatridge, Ryan P. Mulligan, Leon Boegman, and Shiliang Shan
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7751–7766, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7751-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7751-2024, 2024
Short summary
Deep dive into hydrologic simulations at global scale: harnessing the power of deep learning and physics-informed differentiable models (δHBV-globe1.0-hydroDL)
Dapeng Feng, Hylke Beck, Jens de Bruijn, Reetik Kumar Sahu, Yusuke Satoh, Yoshihide Wada, Jiangtao Liu, Ming Pan, Kathryn Lawson, and Chaopeng Shen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7181–7198, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7181-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7181-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Adler, R. F., Huffman, G. J., Chang, A., Ferraro, R., Xie, P. P., Janowiak, J., Rudolf, B., Schneider, U., Curtis, S., Bolvin, D., Gruber, A., Susskind, J., Arkin, P., and Nelkin, E.: The version-2 global precipitation climatology project (GPCP) monthly precipitation analysis (1979–present), J. Hydrometeorol., 4, 1147–1167, 2003.
Allen, R. G.: Using the FAO-56 dual crop coefficient method over an irrigated region as part of an evapotranspiration intercomparison study, J. Hydrol., 229, 27–41, 2000.
Allen, R. G., Tasumi, M., and Trezza, R.: Satellite-Based Energy Balance for Mapping Evapotranspiration with Internalized Calibration (METRIC)-Model, J. Irrig. Drain. E., 133, 380–394, 2007.
Armstrong, R. L., Brodzik, M. J., Knowles, K., and Savoie, M.: Global monthly EASE-Grid snow water equivalent climatology, National Snow and Ice Data Center, Digital media, Boulder, CO, USA, 2005.
Badgley, G., Fisher, J. B., Jiménez, C., Tu, K. P., and Vinukollu, R.: On uncertainty in global terrestrial evapotranspiration estimates from choice of input forcing datasets, J. Hydrometeorol., 16, 1449–1455, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-14-0040.1, 2015.
Download
Short summary
In an effort to develop a global terrestrial evaporation product, four models were forced using both a tower and grid-based data set. Comparisons against flux-tower observations from different biome and land cover types show considerable inter-model variability and sensitivity to forcing type. Results suggest that no single model is able to capture expected flux patterns and response. It is suggested that a multi-model ensemble is likely to provide a more stable long-term flux estimate.