Influence of wind direction on the surface roughness of vineyards

Abstract

Remote sensing-based models are the most viable means of collecting the high-resolution spatially distributed estimates of evaporative water loss needed to manage irrigation and ensure the effective use of limited water resources. However, due to the unique canopy structure and configuration of vineyards, these models may not be able to adequately describe the physical processes driving evapotranspiration from vineyards. Using data collected from 2014 to 2016 as a part of the Grape Remote sensing Atmospheric Profile and Evapotranspiration Experiment (GRAPEX), the twofold objective of this study was to (1) identify the relationship between the roughness parameters, zero-plane displacement height (do) and roughness length for momentum (zo), and local environmental conditions, specifically wind direction and vegetation density and (2) determine the effect of using these relationships on the ability of the remote sensing-based Two-Source Energy Balance (TSEB) model to estimate the sensible (H) and latent (λE) heat fluxes. Although little variation in do was identified during the growing season, a well-defined sigmoidal relationship was observed between zo and wind direction. When the output from a version of the TSEB model incorporating these relationships (TSEBVIN) was compared to output from the standard model (TSEBSTD), there were large changes to the roughness parameters, particularly zo, but only modest changes in the turbulent fluxes. When the output from TSEBVIN was compared to that of a version using a parameterization scheme representing open canopies (TSEBOPN), the mean absolute difference between the estimates of do and zo were 0.44 m and 0.25 m, respectively. While these values represent differences in excess of 45%, the turbulent fluxes differed by just 13 W m−2 or 10%, on average. The results suggest that the TSEB model is largely insensitive to changes in the roughness parameters for the range in roughness values evaluated in this study. This also suggests that the requirement for highly accurate roughness values has limited utility in the application of the TSEB model in vineyard systems. Since there is no significant advantage to using the more complex TSEBOPN and TSEBVIN models, it is recommended that the standard model be used.