Fit for purpose evapotranspiration measurements: A multi-site comparison of lower-cost approaches across croplands and shrublands
Abstract
Evapotranspiration (ET) links the water and energy cycles, yet research-grade eddy covariance (EC) systems may not be the best option to deploy operationally for water management. Emerging lower-cost ET approaches may expand fit-for-purpose observations, but their reliability across contrasting ecosystems, climates, and instrumentation configurations remains uncertain. Here, we evaluate lower-cost ET approaches across a heterogeneous network spanning agriculture and shrublands. We assess LI-710 limited-diagnostics 1-D EC, variance Bowen ratio (VBR), and residual energy (RE) ET against collocated benchmark EC, while accounting for systematic uncertainty associated with energy balance non-closure and random uncertainty arising from turbulent sampling. Raw half-hourly LI-710 fluxes frequently contained spikes, but after quality control they generally agreed well with benchmark EC, with discrepancies at shrubland sites approaching the random uncertainty of EC. LI-710 nevertheless tended to underestimate ET across land covers, including in a replicated sensor experiment where inter-unit precision was high but a common negative bias remained. Energy-balance-closure-derived uncertainty ranges often overlapped between LI-710 and EC, demonstrating the continued value of measured available energy for diagnosing systematic uncertainty. VBR showed relatively low random uncertainty and performed best under intermediate evaporative conditions, but overestimated ET in dry shrublands and underestimated ET in high-ET, advective croplands. A sign-aware commercial VBR implementation partly reduced the latter bias, although departures from the assumed similarity of temperature and water-vapor turbulent transport remained an important limitation. RE performed comparatively well in high-EF irrigated croplands but poorly in shrublands. These results provide field-based evidence for a fit-for-purpose framework: LI-710 is most useful when paired with rigorous quality control and energy-balance measurements, VBR is most robust under intermediate conditions, and RE is best suited to ET-dominated systems. Overall, the value of lower-cost ET measurements depends not only on sensor cost, but also on post-processing transparency, available energy measurements, ecosystem context, and the intended application.
Related
- Technical note: How well do evapotranspiration partitioning approaches perform in moss-covered wetlands?
- Long-Term Trend of Noctilucent Cloud Altitude Detected: A Comparison of Positional Data with Historical Measurements
- Volatile organic compound emissions in croplands: The contributions of crops, soil, and agricultural management practices
- Evaluating hv-block cross-validation for dependence-aware model selection in reference evapotranspiration estimation
- Flooding‐Driven Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Global Upland Croplands
BibTeX
@misc{kim2026purpose,
title = {{Fit for purpose evapotranspiration measurements: A multi-site comparison of lower-cost approaches across croplands and shrublands}},
author = {Yeonuk Kim and Todd G. Caldwell and Justin Huntington and Meetpal Kukal and Maria Isabel Zamora Re and Dragomira Zheleva and Richard Jasoni and Christian Dunkerly and Murphy Gardner and Clarence Robison and Dinesh Gulati and Shawn Naylor and Christopher Pearson and John Volk and Bruno Comini de Andrade and Robert Lotspeich},
howpublished = {EarthArXiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.31223/x55512},
url = {https://eartharxiv.org/repository/view/15262/},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Fit for purpose evapotranspiration measurements: A multi-site comparison of lower-cost approaches across croplands and shrublands
AU - Yeonuk Kim
AU - Todd G. Caldwell
AU - Justin Huntington
AU - Meetpal Kukal
AU - Maria Isabel Zamora Re
AU - Dragomira Zheleva
AU - Richard Jasoni
AU - Christian Dunkerly
AU - Murphy Gardner
AU - Clarence Robison
AU - Dinesh Gulati
AU - Shawn Naylor
AU - Christopher Pearson
AU - John Volk
AU - Bruno Comini de Andrade
AU - Robert Lotspeich
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/30
PB - EarthArXiv
DO - 10.31223/x55512
UR - https://eartharxiv.org/repository/view/15262/
AB - Evapotranspiration (ET) links the water and energy cycles, yet research-grade eddy covariance (EC) systems may not be the best option to deploy operationally for water management. Emerging lower-cost ET approaches may expand fit-for-purpose observations, but their reliability across contrasting ecosystems, climates, and instrumentation configurations remains uncertain. Here, we evaluate lower-cost ET approaches across a heterogeneous network spanning agriculture and shrublands. We assess LI-710 limited-diagnostics 1-D EC, variance Bowen ratio (VBR), and residual energy (RE) ET against collocated benchmark EC, while accounting for systematic uncertainty associated with energy balance non-closure and random uncertainty arising from turbulent sampling. Raw half-hourly LI-710 fluxes frequently contained spikes, but after quality control they generally agreed well with benchmark EC, with discrepancies at shrubland sites approaching the random uncertainty of EC. LI-710 nevertheless tended to underestimate ET across land covers, including in a replicated sensor experiment where inter-unit precision was high but a common negative bias remained. Energy-balance-closure-derived uncertainty ranges often overlapped between LI-710 and EC, demonstrating the continued value of measured available energy for diagnosing systematic uncertainty. VBR showed relatively low random uncertainty and performed best under intermediate evaporative conditions, but overestimated ET in dry shrublands and underestimated ET in high-ET, advective croplands. A sign-aware commercial VBR implementation partly reduced the latter bias, although departures from the assumed similarity of temperature and water-vapor turbulent transport remained an important limitation. RE performed comparatively well in high-EF irrigated croplands but poorly in shrublands. These results provide field-based evidence for a fit-for-purpose framework: LI-710 is most useful when paired with rigorous quality control and energy-balance measurements, VBR is most robust under intermediate conditions, and RE is best suited to ET-dominated systems. Overall, the value of lower-cost ET measurements depends not only on sensor cost, but also on post-processing transparency, available energy measurements, ecosystem context, and the intended application.
ER -