Main Article Content


The current study aims to inter-compare the performance efficiency of the single and the dual source surface energy balance modeling approaches, namely EEFlux and SETMI, respectively for real time catchment scale - crop water demand estimations. For this, the afore-stated two surface energy balance modelling approaches were applied on the Narmada Canal Project, Sanchore, Rajasthan, India for estimating catchment scale actual evapotranspiration (ETa) values for the Rabi cropping seasons of the years 2013-14 and 2018-19, after incorporating the basic satellite data derived inputs viz. Land use, Land surface temperature and Gridded weather data. Due to the non-availability of the catchment scale ground based daily reference evapotranspiration (ETo) values for the study area, the Global Land Data Assimilation System based gridded meteorological data product was utilized, as a substitute for obtaining observed actual evapotranspiration (ETa) values for the investigated Rabi seasons of the study area. These actual evapotranspiration values were compared with those estimated through the single source, EEFlux and the dual source, SETMI modelling approaches to ascertain their comparative performance efficiency through the use of the five statistical indices viz. Mean Absolute Error, Root Mean Square Error, Mean Bias Error, Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency and the Index of Agreement. The investigations revealed almost at par performance of the two modelling approaches. However, it was concluded that in contrast to the more detailed dual source approach i.e., SETMI, the simple single source approach i.e., EEFlux seemed to be more promising due to its user-friendly implementation and input data automation.


Canal water allocation Crop water demand mapping Energy budgeting Evapotranspiration Flux Modeling

Article Details

How to Cite
pandey, R., Kaur, R., GONCALVES, I. Z., Neale, C., Khanna, M., Singh, M., Sehgal, V. K., Sarangi, A., & Math, M. K. (2024). Single vs dual source surface energy balance model based actual evapotranspiration estimation. Environment Conservation Journal, 25(1), 84–95.

Funding data


  1. Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D. & Smith, M. (1998). Crop Evapotranspiration – Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
  3. Allen, R. G., Tasumi, M. & Trezza, R. (2007). Satellite-based energy balance for mapping evapotranspiration with internalized calibration (METRIC) model. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 133, 380-394. DOI:
  4. Allen, R. G., Morton, C., Kamble, B., Kilic, A., Huntington, J., Thau, D., Gorelick, N., Erickson, T., Moore, R., Trezza, R., Ratcliffe, I. & Robison, C. (2015). EEFlux: a landsat based evapotranspiration mapping tool on the google earth engine. In: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers irrigation symposium: Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Irrigation (pp: 1-11), Long Beach, California USA.
  5. Bastiaanssen, W. G. M., Pelgrum, H., Wang, J., Ma, Y., Moreno, J. F., Roerink, G. J. & Van der Wal, T. (1998). A remote sensing surface energy balance algorithm for land (SEBAL). Part 2: Validation. Journal of Hydrology, 212-213, 213-229. DOI:
  6. Courault, D., Seguin, B. & Olioso, A. (2005). Review on estimation of evapotranspiration from remote sensing data: From empirical to numerical modeling approaches. Irrigation and Drainage Systems, 19, 223-249. DOI:
  7. Dai, L., Fu, R., Zhao, Z., Guo, X., Du, Y., Hu, Z. & Cao, G. (2022). Comparison of fourteen reference evapotranspiration models with lysimeter measurements at a site in the humid alpine meadow, Northeastern Qinghai-Tibetan plateau. Frontiers in Plant Science, 13, 854196. French, A. N., Hunsaker, D.J. & Thorp, K. R. (2015). Remote sensing of evapotranspiration over cotton using the TSEB and METRIC energy balance models. Remote Sensing of Environment,158, 281-294. DOI:
  8. Geli, H. M. E. & Neale, C. M. U. (2012). Spatial Evapotranspiration Modelling Interface (SETMI). Remote Sensing and Hydrology, 352, 171-174.
  9. Gowda, P. H., Chávez, J. L., Howell, T. A., Marek, T. H. & New, L. L. (2008). Surface energy balance-based evapotranspiration mapping in the Texas high plains. Sensors, 8, 5186-5201. DOI:
  10. Huntingford, C., Verhoef, A. & Stewart, J. (2000). Dual versus single source models for estimating surface temperature of African savannah. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 4(1), 185-191. DOI:
  11. Kool, D., Agam, N., Lazarovitch, N., Heitman, J. L., Sauer, T. J. & Ben-Gal, A. (2014). A review of approaches for evapotranspiration partitioning. Agricultural and forest meteorology, 184, 56-70. DOI:
  12. Kushwaha, N. L., Rajput, J., Sena, D. R., Elbeltagi, A., Singh, D. K. & Mani, I. (2022). Evaluation of data-driven hybrid machine learning algorithms for modelling daily reference evapotranspiration. Atmosphere-Ocean, 60(2), 1-22. DOI:
  13. Kustas, W. P. & Norman, J. M. (1996). Use of remote sensing for evapotranspiration monitoring over land surfaces. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 41(4), 495–516. DOI:
  14. Liaqat, U. W. & Choi, M. (2015). Surface energy fluxes in the Northeast Asia ecosystem: SEBS and METRIC models using Landsat satellite images. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 214–215, 60-79. DOI:
  15. Li, Z. L., Tang, R., Wan, Z., Bi, Y., Zhou, C., Tang, B., Yan, G. & Zhang, X. (2009). A review of current methodologies for regional evapotranspiration estimation from remotely sensed data. Sensors, 9, 3801–3853. DOI:
  16. Liou, Y. A. & Kar, S. K. (2014). Evapotranspiration estimation with remote sensing and various surface energy balance algorithms-A review. Energies, 7(5), 2821-2849. DOI:
  17. Merlin, O. & Chehbouni, A. (2004). Different approaches in estimating heat flux using dual angle observations of radiative surface temperature. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 25(1), 275-289. DOI:
  18. Moriasi, D. N., Arnold, J. G., Van Liew, M. W., Bingner, R. L., Harmel, R. D. & Veith, T. L. (2007). Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Transactions of the ASABE, 50(3), 885-900. DOI:
  19. Nash, J. E. & Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970). River flow forecasting through conceptual models’ part 1- A discussion of principles. Journal of Hydrology, 10(3), 282-290. DOI:
  20. Neale, C. M. U., Bausch, W. C. & Heerman, D. F. (1989). Development of Reflectance- Based Crop Coefficients for Corn. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 32(6), 1891-99. DOI:
  21. Neale, C. M. U., Geli, H. M. E., Kustas, W. P., Alfieri, J. G., Gowda, P. H., Evett, S. R., Prueger, J. H., Hipps, L. E., Dulaney, W. P., Chavez, J. L., French, A. N. & Howell, T. A. (2012). Soil water content estimation using a remote sensing-based hybrid evapotranspiration modeling approach. Advances in Water Resources, 50, 152-161. DOI:
  22. Norman, J. M., Kustas, W. P. & Humes, K. S. (1995). Source Approach for Estimating Soil and Vegetation Energy Fluxes in Observations of Directional Radiometric Surface Temperature. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 77(3-4), 263-93. DOI:
  23. Norman, J. M., Kustas, W. P., Preuger, J. H. & Diak, G. R. (2000). Surface flux estimation using radiometric temperature: a dual-temperature-difference method to minimize measurement errors. Water Resources Research, 36, 2263-2274. DOI:
  24. Saha, S., Moorthi, S., Pan, H., Wu, X., Wang, J., Nadiga, S., Tripp, P., Kistler, R., Woollen, J., Behringer, D. & coauthors. (2010). The NCEP Climate Forecast System Reanalysis. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 91, 1015-1058. DOI:
  25. Saha, S., Moorthi, S., Wu, X., Wang, J., Nadiga, S., Tripp, P., Behringer, D., Hou, Y., Chuang, H., Iredell, M. & coauthors. (2013). The NCEP Climate Forecast System Version 2. Journal of Climate, 27, 2185-2208. DOI:
  26. Salam, R., Islam, A. R. M. T., Pham, Q. B., Dehghani, M., Al-Ansari, N. & Linh, N. T. T. (2020). The optimal alternative for quantifying reference evapotranspiration in climatic sub-regions of Bangladesh. Science and Reports, 10(1), 20171. DOI:
  27. Singh, R. K., Irmak, A., Irmak, S. & Martin, D. L. (2008). Application of SEBAL Model for Mapping Evapotranspiration and Estimating Surface Energy Fluxes in South-Central Nebraska. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 134(3), 273-285. DOI:
  28. Teixeira, A. H. D. C., Bastiaanssen, W. G. M., Ahmadd, M. D. & Bos, M. G. (2009). Reviewing SEBAL input parameters for assessing evapotranspiration and water productivity for the Low-Middle São Francisco River basin, Brazil Part A: Calibration and validation. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 149, 462-476. DOI:
  29. Timmermans, W.J., Kustas, W.P., Anderson, M.C. & French, A. N. (2007). An intercomparison of the Surface Energy Balance Algorithm for Land (SEBAL) and the Two-Source Energy Balance (TSEB) modeling schemes. Remote Sensing of Environment, 108(4), 369-384. DOI:
  30. Troufleau, A. D., Lhomme, J., Monteny, B. & Vidal, A. (1997). Sensible heat flux and radiometric surface temperature over sparse sahelian vegetation. I. An experimental analysis of the kB-1 parameter. Journal of Hydrology, 188-189, 815-838. DOI:
  31. Verhoef, A., McNaughton, K. G. & Jacobs, A. F. G. (1997). A parameterization of momentum roughness length and displacement height for a wide range of canopy densities. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 1(1), 81-91. DOI:
  32. Vorosmarty, C., Mclntyre, P., Gessner, M., Dudgeon, D., Prusevich, A., Green, P., Glidden, S., Bunn, S., Sullivan, C., Liermann, C. & Davies, P. (2010). Global threat to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature, 467(7315), 555-561. DOI:
  33. Wang, K. & Dickinson, R. E. (2012). A review of global terrestrial evapotranspiration: Observation, modeling, climatology, and climatic variability. Reviews of Geophysics, 50(2), 1-54. DOI:
  34. Yuan, X., Wood, E. F., Luo, L. & Pan, M. (2011). A first look at Climate Forecast System version 2 (CFSv2) for hydrological seasonal prediction. Geophysical Research Letters, 38(13), 1-7. DOI:
  35. Zhang, K., Kimball, J. S. & Running, S. W. (2016). A review of remote sensing based actual evapotranspiration estimation. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water, 3(6), 834-853. DOI: