Evapotranspiration models of different complexity for multiple land cover types

A comparison between half‐hourly and daily measured and computed evapotranspiration (ET) using three models of different complexity, namely, the Priestley–Taylor (P‐T), the reference Penman–Monteith (P‐M) and the Common Land Model (CLM), was conducted using three AmeriFlux sites under different land cover and climate conditions (i.e. arid grassland, temperate forest and subhumid cropland). Using the reference P‐M model with a semiempirical soil moisture function to adjust for water‐limiting conditions yielded ET estimates in reasonable agreement with the observations root mean square error (RMSE) of 64–87 W m^?2 for half‐hourly and RMSE of 0.5–1.9 mm day^?1 for daily] and similar to the complex Common Land Model (RMSE of 60–94 W m^?2 for half‐hourly and RMSE of 0.4–2.1 mm day^?1 for daily) at the grassland and cropland sites. However, the semiempirical soil moisture function was not applicable particularly for the P‐T model at the forest site, suggesting that adjustments to key model variables may be required when applied to diverse land covers. On the other hand, under certain land cover/environmental conditions, the use of microwave‐derived soil moisture information was found to be a reliable metric of regional moisture conditions to adjust simple ET models for water‐limited cases. Further studies are needed to evaluate the utility of the simplified methods for different landscapes. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.