Agricultural Water Management 98 (2010) 4554

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Agricultural Water Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat

Assessing satellite-based basal crop coefcients for

irrigated grapes (Vitis vinifera L.)
Isidro Campos a, , Christopher M.U. Neale b , Alfonso Calera a , Claudio Balbontn a ,
Jose Gonzlez-Piqueras a
a
Instituto Desarrollo Regional (IDR), Grupo Teledeteccin y SIG, Universidad Castilla La Mancha, Albacete, Spain
b
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A combined methodology of basal crop coefcient (Kcb ) derived from vegetation indices (VI) obtained from
Received 29 September 2009 satellite images and a daily soil water balance in the root zone of the crop was proposed to accurately esti-
Received in revised form 5 May 2010 mate the daily grape crop coefcient and actual evapotranspiration. The modeled values were compared
Accepted 20 July 2010
with eld measurements of crop evapotranspiration (ET) using an energy balance eddy-covariance ux
Available online 25 August 2010
tower and adjusted for closure using the measured Bowen ratio. A linear relation between Kcb and VI for
vineyard was obtained, Kcb = 1.44 NDVI-0.10 and Kcb = 1.79 SAVI-0.08. The correlation of the measured
Keywords:
crop coefcient (Kc ) and modeled (Kcrf ) exhibits a linear tendency, Kc = 0.96Kcrf , r2 = 0.67. Other derived
Evapotranspiration of grapes
Vegetation indices
parameters such as weekly Kc and daily and weekly ET show good consistency with measurements and
Remote sensing higher coefcients of determination. The study of the soil water balance suggests the importance of soil
Canopy reectance water storage in grapes within the La Mancha region. These results validate the use of remote sensing as
Crop coefcients a tool for the estimation of evapotranspiration of irrigated wine grapes planted on trellis systems.
2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
One of the most important crop management practices in
semiarid areas is the application of irrigation water. The precise
estimation of crop water requirements allows for adequate irriga-
tion management and savings of water. One accepted methodology
for the estimation of crop water requirements is the use of refer-
ence evapotranspiration and a crop coefcient (Allen et al., 1998;
Doorenbos and Pruitt, 1977). Estimation of the crop coefcient
(single or dual approach) is required for calculating crop evap-
otranspiration and maintaining a soil moisture balance such as
described by the FAO56 methodology. A large amount of research
has been conducted during the last 30 years to estimate the stan-
dard values and temporal evolution of crop coefcient (Allen et al.,
1998; Wright, 1982). Nevertheless, adaptation to local crop vari-
eties, management practices and climate is always recommended.
One type of crop for which local management practices can be more
relevant is in the case of fruit trees, where the standard param-
eters can vary greatly from one area to other. Amid fruit crops,
grapes have a great relevance; the typical low planting densities of
vineyards in many areas and the commonly low vegetation cover
Corresponding author at: Instituto Desarrollo Regional (IDR), Grupo Telede-
teccin y SIG, Universidad Castilla La Mancha, Campus Universitario s/n, 02071
Albacete, Spain. Tel.: +34 967 599200x2640; fax: +34 967 599349.
E-mail address: Isidro.campos@uclm.es (I. Campos).
development [near 30% at peak cover] due to row spacing, indi-
cate that soil evaporation could be an important parameter in the
estimation of grape evapotranspiration.
The use of remote sensing in the assessment of crop water
requirements through the estimation of crop coefcients from
remotely sensed vegetation indices has a long development history.
Heilman et al. (1982) exposed the possibility of reectance derived
vegetation indices (VI) to describe crop evolution. Bausch and Neale
(1987) and Neale et al. (1989) demonstrated the possibility of relat-
ing the crop coefcient of herbaceous crops with VI derived from
remote sensing. Choundhury et al. (1994) established a relation
between normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) derived
from a radiative transfer model and a transpiration coefcient cal-
culated for wheat under different soil background and vegetation
cover conditions, providing a theoretical background of this rela-
tionship. Hunsaker et al. (2003) also showed a linear relationship
between NDVI and basal crop coefcient for cotton in the growing
stages before full cover. Other relationships reported for herba-
ceous crops but using the soil adjusted vegetation index (SAVI) as
the reference VI were proposed by Bausch (1993) and Choundhury
et al. (1994). These relationships have been studied for many crops
and recently for potato (Jayanthi et al., 2007), cotton and sugar beets
(Gonzlez-Dugo and Mateos, 2008), and wheat (Duchemin et al.,
2006; Er-Raki et al., 2007). Recently, some studies are combining
thermal and optical remote sensing methodologies to derive VI-
crop coefcient relations (Rafn et al., 2008; Singh and Irmak, 2009)
or compare the results of both methodologies respect to accu-

0378-3774/$ see front matter 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2010.07.011
46 I. Campos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 98 (2010) 4554

rate ground data (Gonzalez-Dugo et al., 2009). Within the study

region of our experiment Cuesta et al. (2005) checked the ability to
obtain single coefcient from satellite data for several annual crops
and Gonzlez-Piqueras (2006) obtained a good agreement between
crop coefcient and VI for wheat and corn comparing reectance-
based crop coefcients from eld radiometry with lysimeter data.
These previous studies developed relationships between vegeta-
tion indices and basal crop coefcient for herbaceous crops, but
the development of this relationship for fruit trees such as grapes
remains unexplored.
This paper assesses the estimation of grape evapotranspira-
tion based on a basal crop coefcient derived from VI obtained
from satellite imagery. This spectral basal crop coefcient derived
from spectral reectance, was used to estimate evapotranspira-
tion according to the dual crop coefcient FAO-56 approach. The
proposed model is validated through comparisons with measured
crop evapotranspiration using eddy-covariance techniques over an
irrigated production vineyard in Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. The
development of a methodology to derive a spectral basal crop
coefcient based on remote sensing could lead to an operational
methodology for the assessment of water requirements for grape
crops over large areas. The availability of satellite data with ade-
quate temporal and spatial resolution could facilitate the use of
remote sensing as valid tool for irrigation scheduling of vine crops.

1.1. Study site Fig. 1. Aerial orthophotograph of the vineyard study eld showing the location of
the eddy-covariance ux station and the surrounding elds with vegetation and
The study eld was located in the province of Albacete, south- other crops.

east of Spain, (39 16 34 N, 1 58 32 W, 700 m. above MSL). The
climatology in the area is described as Temperate Mediterranean
(Gonzlez-Piqueras, 2006; Montoro et al., 2008) according to the
Papadakis Classication. Mean annual precipitation for the last
thirty years is 340 mm and the mean annual temperature is 13.6 C
for the same period (INM, 2004). Soils are classied as Inceptisoil
according with the USDA 1987 Soil Taxonomy (IGN, 1992). Soil tex-
ture at the experimental eld is classied as sandy clay with the
presence of abundant gravel.
The study eld was a drip irrigated vineyard, 18.5 ha in size,
planted with four different varieties of wine grapes that were
seven years old: the Cencibel variety was predominant but Caber-
net Sauvignon, Shiraz and Merlot were also cultivated in smaller
proportions. The study eld was surrounded by other crops such as
winter cereals and irrigated fruit trees and a pine forest (Fig. 1).
The plants were grown on vertical shoot positioned trellis, with
wood pruning during the dormant period and additional pruning
during the vegetative growth to adjust the vegetative develop-
ment. No tillage or cultivation is conducted during the growing
season but the application of herbicides prevented the growth of
weeds. The vine spacing was 1.5 m and the row spacing 3.0 m which
were oriented approximately in the northsouth direction. The row
direction and plant spacing are very representative of wine grapes
in the area, although some variations can occur as a function of plot
dimensions. The drip line was placed on the trellis below the plants
with drippers spaced 1.0 m apart.
Vineyard production in 2007 was 14,000 kg ha1 , around
7 kg/tree, which was similar to previous year yields, and no infec-
tion or diseases were detected in the plants during the growing
season. Irrigation was performed according to local production
practices, with the application of 22 mm of water every 12 days,
with a total applied irrigation depth of 143 mm throughout the
growing season. Grapevine management was oriented towards
increasing the fruit quality and included the control of foliage
development to reduce the competition for assimilates with grape
berries (Pellegrino et al., 2006). Unnecessary vegetation devel-
opment increases crop water consumption, reducing soil water
storage and increasing the irrigation requirements. In contrast,
high vegetation reduction produces excessive bunch exposition an
may reduce the grape quality (Haselgrove et al., 2000; Jackson and
Lombard, 1993). The shoots were pruned in the experimental eld
around DOY 187 and no new leaves or stems were observed after
that date, so the fractional vegetation cover remained stable at 30%
after that date.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Estimation of evapotranspiration
A theoretical approach to estimate crop evapotranspiration (ET)
is given by the PenmanMonteith combination equation (Eq. (1)).
The crop coefcient (Eq. (2)) (Allen et al., 1998; Doorenbos and
Pruitt, 1977) is the ratio between crop evapotranspiration and ref-
erence crop evapotranspiration (ET0 ), which may be computed by
means of the FAO56 PenmanMonteith equation (Eq. (3)) (Allen et
al., 1998). The variables utilized in the formulation of evapotranspi-
ration are net radiation (Rn ) heat ux into the soil (G), air density
(a ), specic heat of air (cp ), vapor pressure decit (es ea ), the
thermodynamic psychrometric constant (), aerodynamic resis-
tance (ra ), canopy resistance (rc ), wind speed adjusted to 2 m of
height (u2 ), air temperature (T) and saturation slope vapor pres-
sure curve at air temperature (), the subscript 0 denotes grass
as the reference surface used in the computation of ET0 .
(Rn G) + a cp (es ea )/ra
ET = (1)
 + (1 + rc /ra )
ET
Kc = (2)
ET0
0.408(Rn0 G0 ) + (900/(T + 273))u2 (es ea )
ET0 = (3)
 + (1 + 0.34u2 )
The model proposed in this paper to calculate the crop evap-
otranspiration for grapes is based on the dual crop coefcient
methodology (Wright, 1982). In particular, we used the basal crop
coefcient approach (Kcb ) with a soil evaporation term (Ke ) and
 I. Campos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 98 (2010) 4554
adjustments to Kcb to account for water stress in the root zone,
modeled as Ks (Allen et al., 1998) (Eq. (4)). Actual crop evapotran-
spiration resulting with this formulation taking into account the
presence of water stress will be named ETa in this paper.
ETa = (Ke + Kcb Ks )ET0 (4)
The reectance-based crop coefcient was obtained by means of a
linear transformation between the measured basal crop coefcient
and the VI derived from canopy reectance estimated from satellite
image (Bausch and Neale, 1987; Neale et al., 1989). In production
agriculture, the actual crop growth usually differs from the ideal
conditions which the standard crop curves represent. Thus, the
use of a basal crop coefcient derived from multi-temporal surface
reectance inputs can provide a better representation of the real
eld conditions than tabulated basal crop coefcients which are
based on average climatic and production management conditions.
The reectance-based basal crop coefcient will be named Kcbrf in
this paper. Crop coefcient computed using Kcbrf and Ke is named
Kcrf in this paper. The Kcrf is comparable to the adjusted crop coef-
cient described in the FAO-56 manual (Allen et al., 1998), because
Kcb is adapted to the particular crop development characteristics
obtained by the remotely sensed inputs.
A daily water balance in the soil root zone was performed fol-
lowing Eq. (5), after the simplications proposed in Eq. (6), in order
to estimate Ks ; and for the surface soil layer [10 cm] to compute Ke .
Due to the absence of capillary rise (CR) from groundwater table,
and insignicant deep percolation (DPi ) and runoff from the soil
(RO) in the study eld, Eq. (5) was simplied to the one described
in Eq. (6). Other terms relative to water inputs such as irrigation
(Ii ) and precipitation (P) were measured. Dr,i and Dr,i1 refer to the
soil moisture depletion on the day and previous day time step. DPi
is an important component in the soil water balance under high
irrigation or precipitation regimes, but in the conditions described
in this experiment and having into account the evidence of max-
imum irrigation deep detected by the humidity sensors it can be
neglected.
The calculation of these coefcients is described by Allen et al.
(1998), taking into account the soil physical water retention prop-
erties as well as the special characteristics of the vine crop, i.e. drip
irrigation, high row spacing and low fraction of vegetation cover.
Dr,i = Dr,i1 (P RO)i Ii CRi + ET + DPi (5)
Dr,i = Dr,i1 Pi Ii + ET (6)
The soil water balance was computed beginning on DOY 120 of
2007 and the soil prole was assumed full watered at this time,
This supposition is based in the study of the water balance dur-
ing the previous grapes dormancy period, after the vines from the
2006s growing season had lost their leaves. The soil prole was
assumed to be at 35% of available water at that point in time, a value
of depletion beyond which grapes are considered to be stressed.
The addition of winter and spring rains to the prole brought the
root zone soil prole to eld capacity at the beginning of the 2007
growing season, DOY 120, corroborated by the soil moisture water
balance modeling. At the end of the 2007 season, the modeled soil
moisture in the prole was much higher than the 35% assumed at
the end of 2006, as a result of two late irrigations. This is a com-
mon irrigation water management practice which was also used
in 2006, leading us to believe that the assumption of 35% available
water at the end of the 2006 season for initiating the water balance
modeling, is conservative.
47
2.2. Field data
2.2.1. Crop evapotranspiration measurements
Crop evapotranspiration was measured with a full energy bal-
ance eddy-covariance ux tower placed in the vineyard. The ux
tower included the follow instrumentation: LI-7500 Infrared Gas
Analyzer (IRGA); 3D Sonic Anemometer (CSAT3); Kipp & Zonen
four-way Net Radiometer; HFP01-SC Soil Heat Flux Plates and soil
temperature thermocouples for the correction of the measured soil
heat uxes. The sonic anemometer and IRGA were placed at 3.0 m
above the ground surface. The fetch in the main wind direction
(from the northwest) was 207 m (Fig. 1). The relationship fetch-
to-height used in this work was approximately 1:70, the which is
mentioned by Stannard (1997) to allow at least 80% of the EC mea-
surement was in equilibrium with the studied surface. Following
the methodology proposed by Schuepp et al. (1990) the 90% of the
accumulated ux (effective fetch) had their source inside a limited
area to 159 m and the maximum contribution to the ux was at 8 m
from the tower.
Because the simultaneous transfer of sensible and latent heat
causes changes in the moist air density it was necessary to apply
some routine corrections to the raw data to adjust for spurious
uxes when air is measured volumetrically. Standard corrections
were applied using the theory developed by Webb et al. (1980).
Post-acquisition corrections were apply using the software TK2
(Mauder et al., 2007). This software correct for the errors in the
wind speed vertical component (Kaimal and Finnigan, 1994), sensor
separation and path-length averaging (Massman, 2000) and elim-
inates spurious ux values (spikes). The data were processed to
obtain 30 min intervals and averaged for each 24 h, including the
data obtained during the night period, to obtain the daily aver-
age ux values. Daily ux measurements of latent heat ux (LE)
and sensible heat ux (H) were adjusted following the Bowen-
ratio closure method. This approach assumes that the Bowen ratio
(Bowen, 1926) is correctly measured by the EC system and uses it
to proportionally adjust H and LE (Twine et al., 2000) and force clo-
sure with the available energy or net radiation minus soil heat ux
(Rn G). The soil heat ux (G) was obtained by averaging measured
values from ux plates at three different positions between rows,
to take into account the heterogeneity in plant cover. The daily val-
ues of adjusted LE were transformed to mm day1 to obtain daily
measured crop evapotranspiration (ETmeasured ).
For the dataset analyzed herein more than the 90% of the daily
data ux presents an energy balance closure greater than 0.85; it
causes an uncertain in ETmeasured determination lower than 15%
of available energy that is traduced in an uncertain lower than
0.5 mm day1 in the daily ux determination for the 90% of the
data. The closure methods are applied to reduce this uncertain and
although the literature is not conclusive about which is the best
method to close the energy balance the two more accepted are the
residual method and the Bowen-ratio method (Twine et al., 2000).
We select the method Bowen-ratio because it preserves in a better
way the conditions of the raw eld data, since it does not discard
any of the two uxes and just distributes in a pondered way the
disclosures.
2.2.2. Reference evapotranspiration
To perform the comparison between ETmeasured and ETa data
using the crop coefcient approach, referente evapotranspira-
tion values (ET0 ) were required as an input to the model. The
daily ET0 was calculated using the FAO56 PenmanMonteith
equation (Allen et al., 1998). The required meteorological parame-
ters, i.e. wind velocity and vapor pressure decit were measured
with an automated weather station, placed 2.96 m above the
ground, and adjusted to 2 m height according to the wind pro-
le over an ideal reference surface. The station included a Vaisala
48 I. Campos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 98 (2010) 4554

Table 1
Path-row and acquisition dates for the cloud-free Landsat 5 images used in the analysis.

DOY 126 151 174 183 190 199 206 215 238 247 270

Path-row 200-33 199-33 200-33 199-33 200-33 199-33 200-33 199-33 200-33 199-33 200-33

thermometerhygrometer, an anemometer, Wind Monitor 05103- analysis of soil moisture in the entire soil volume explored by the
5 (Young Company) and a CM3 pyranometer (Kipp & Zonen), for roots along with the use of eld calibrated moisture sensors. These
measuring the incident radiation. The net radiation and soil heat considerations will be taken into account in future research.
uxes were modeled according to the characteristics of a reference
surface as is described by Allen et al. (1998) taking the measured 2.3.1. Soil water balance parameterization
incident solar radiation as the input. The evaporation coefcient methodology proposed in FAO 56
was adapted to the special characteristics of the vine crop in terms
2.2.3. Satellite-based surface reectance and vegetation indices of wet and sun-exposed bare soil after each drip irrigation event.
Vegetation indices used to model the basal crop coefcient were The low vegetation cover, which reached 30% at peak vegetative
obtained from Landsat-5 TM satellite images. Fortunately, the study cover, could lead to a high evaporation rate of water from the bare
eld was located in the overlap zone between two Landsat paths soil surface after irrigation or rainfall events. ETmeasured after these
(Path-Row 199-33 and 200-33) which increased the temporal reso- events during the study period showed an increase as described
lution from 16 to 79 days. Eleven cloud-free images over the study by the FAO-56 model. The width of the surface wetted by the irri-
area were used, listed in Table 1. gation system, fw, was xed at 0.9 m (30% of the surface) based
The image processing included geometric correction and rec- on visual observations in the eld after irrigation events. However,
tication of the Landsat-5 TM optical bands. An atmospheric the fraction of soil wetted and exposed, few, is remodeled taking
correction methodology based on the estimation of atmospheric into account the portion of wet soil shaded during the day result-
conditions through image properties (Guanter et al., 2007) was ing from the row orientation and canopy height and position of the
applied. The procedure includes image calibration using the coef- sun in the sky.
cients proposed in the literature for Landsat-5 TM (Chander et al., The parameters and values used in the soil water balance related
2007). to the deep rooting system and soil moisture are presented in
The vegetation indices were calculated on a pixel-by-pixel basis Table 2. Similar root depths have been reported for grapes by direct
and averaged for the entire study plot, avoiding eld edge pixels. observation (Pellegrino et al., 2004) compatible with the assumed
The normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) (Rouse et al., root soil depth used in our modeling. The soil water depletion with-
1973), and the soil adjusted vegetation index (SAVI) (Huete, 1988), out reduction of the evapotranspiration, p, was modeled following
was used in this study. The seasonal evolution of the VI during the the procedures proposed in FAO-56 modied for the grape crop by
eld experiment along with main crop phenology dates are also using a p value of 0.65 for an ETmeasured of 5 mm day1 .
shown in Fig. 3. Field capacity was determined in laboratory (300 cm-H2 O suc-
tion), using pressure plates, for unaltered samples. Wilting point
2.3. Measured soil water content was obtained by means of textural percentage measured in labora-
tory and using the approximation proposed by Saxton et al. (1986).
A direct measurement of soil water content was made using This measurements was made for the soils in an adjacent eld,
EnviroScan soil water capacitance probes. The calibration equation
provided by the manufactures was applied to frequency readings Table 2
scaled with respect to air and water measurements. The probes Value and units for the parameters used in the soil water balance based on the
FAO-56 methodology.
were placed at different depths, from 10 to 80 cm, and at different
distances from the drip emitters to measure the possible varia- Parameter FAO-56 symbol Value and unit
tions of soil moisture from wet (close to the emitters) to dry (at Soil water content at  FC 0.29 cm3 cm3
the middle of the space between the rows). eld capacity
According to the soil moisture measurements, a typical irriga- Soil water content at  WP 0.14 cm3 cm3
tion wetted the soil up to 75 cm away from the emitter to a depth wilting point
Soil water balance
of 50 cm. The probes placed beyond this point in the space between
parameters at soil
rows did not register the effect of irrigations. However, these probes Surface
did register a continuous decrease of soil moisture throughout the Depth of soil surface Ze 0.1 m
season, indicating that the vine root system actually extended into evaporation layer
this soil volume. The soil moisture trend depended on the probe Total evaporable water TEW 19.4 mm
Readily evaporable REW 4.0 mm
location. In the middle of the row, the deep probes did not register water
increases in soil moisture after an irrigation event, but the values Fraction of soil surface fw 0.30
decreased from 10 to 80 cm of depth. wetted by irrigation
The capacitance probes were not calibrated for the specic soil Fraction of soil surface few 0.12
wetted and
physical characteristics, i.e. the range of soil moisture between
sun-exposed
eld capacity and wilting point. Installation deciencies such as the Soil water balance
presence of air gaps between the access tube and the soil may have parameters at root
also affected the measurements with some of the probes. For such, zone
these measurements were only considered as relative qualitative Soil depletion fraction p 0.65
without stress
values. However the soil water content measurements did describe Maximum effective Zr max 2 m.
the evolution of the water content in the soil and established the root deep
soil volume from which the grape plants were extracting water. Effective root depth Zr min 2 m.
The comparison of soil water depletion predicted by the modeling during initial growth
stage
with respect to soil water content measurements needs a complete
 I. Campos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 98 (2010) 4554
Table 3
Estimated and measured eld capacity and wilting point values for the soil in the
adjacent eld (E. Torres, 2009, personal communication).
Parameter Estimated
Mean
Field capacity cm3 cm3 0.26
Wilting point cm3 cm3 0.14
these data are shown in Table 3. The reason to combine estima-
tions from textural analysis and pressure plates measurements is
that at higher suctions water retention is more inuenced by tex-
ture and at lower suctions the amount of water retained depends
mainly on the soil structure (Hillel, 1998).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Seasonal crop evapotranspiration
Total crop evapotranspiration water consumption during the
measuring campaign, from DOY 148 to DOY 272, was 321 mm
(Fig. 2); the cumulative ET0 was 705 mm during the same period.
Eddy covariance tower measurements started on DOY 148 when
the vines were growth but not full developed, thus ET during the
developing phase initial stage were not measured. Considering a
linear extrapolation of Kc back in time from the rst measure-
ment date, DOY 148, to the date of phenological stage 2 to 3
leaves unfolded, which corresponds to DOY 120, the total water
consumption during the growing season, from May to October,
was estimated as 342 mm. During the same period the cumulative
ET0 was 824 mm. The difference between irrigation water applied
(143 mm) and that used through evapotranspiration (342 mm)
shows the importance of the water stored in the soil resulting from
Fig. 2. Calculated ET0 , ETmeasured , estimated Kc , along with irrigation and rain events and vegetation cover development for the studied vineyard.
49
winter and spring precipitation and the use of that water by the
grape plants. The precipitation during the growing season was only
45 mm.
Measured Seasonal ETmeasured reported in this study can be compared
Mean
with previous reported values for grapes. Evans et al. (1993), in
0.29 a complete review on annual water consumption of grapes found a
0.22 range between 450 and 900 mm. According to these values, the sea-
sonal consumption of 342 mm for our study eld during the 2007
growing season appears to be low. The difference could be due to
the evapotranspiration outside of the growing season, Bucks et al.
(1985) calculated a seasonal evapotranspiration for grapes in Ari-
zona ranging from 310 to 485 mm, closer to the lower part of the
range described by Evans et al. (1993).
Apart from the different vegetation canopy, water management
and plant development, ET0 has a great inuence in the differences.
To reduce the impact of atmospheric demand variations in ET, the
discussion is made in terms of Kc , the ratio between ETmeasured and
ET0 .
3.1.1. Estimated crop coefcient
Daily Kc values were obtained by dividing ETmeasured with the
reference evapotranspiration calculated as described above. Kc thus
derived includes plant transpiration and soil evaporation. Fig. 2
shows the temporal evolution of Kc together with the temporal
evolution of ET0 , along with dates of irrigation and precipitation
and canopy ground cover development, canopy ground cover were
measured by analyzing digital photographs obtained from nadir
over the eld.
Previous studies with Thomson Seedless grapes in California
(Williams and Ayars, 2005) showed a linear relation between per-
cent of shaded area and Kc . That equation predicts a Kc equal to
0.55 for a vineyard with the same plant cover (shaded area) as our
50 I. Campos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 98 (2010) 4554
Fig. 3. Evolution of TM5 based VI during the 2007 grape growing season with the
main phenological stages for the grapes.
study plot. That relationship was developed for daily irrigated vines,
therefore, that value must be compared with Kc values we obtained
after irrigation events, of around 0.58, which are very close to those
presented by Williams and Ayars (2005). Montoro et al. (2008)
reported a monthly mean Kc around 0.58 at peak cover, august,
for daily irrigated grapes, measured using a lysimeter in the same
region of La-Mancha. These values are higher than the monthly
values obtained herein, 0.48 in august. These discrepancies may be
mainly due to the effect of higher irrigation frequency on Kc result-
ing from increased soil evaporation. Similar differences were found
with Kc obtained at other locations for vines with high irrigation fre-
quency (Evans et al., 1993; Teixeira et al., 2007). These differences
indicate the relevance of different irrigation management schemes
for saving water on irrigated vineyards. For a rainfed vineyard, in
the same region of La-Mancha, Oliver and Sene (1992) describe a
seasonal Kc closer to 0.2 for vines in the absence of soil evaporation.
The lower vegetation cover of 25% reported by those authors could
also be one of the reasons for this lower Kc value. Soil moisture
stress due to the typical water shortage conditions in this semiarid
region could be another reason to explain the lower values.
3.2. Vegetation indices and grapevine development
The ability of VI to relate to crop evapotranspiration is based on
the relationship with vegetation cover, leaf area index, and other
biophysical variables directly related to ET (Gonzlez-Piqueras,
2006; Montero et al., 1999). In Fig. 3 the seasonal evolution of NDVI
and SAVI for the grapevine canopy is shown. Temporal VI patterns
exhibit an initial phase of linear increase, followed by a plateau with
Fig. 4. VIKcbrf relationships for both vegetation indices used in the study. Kcb for the lowest VI values under bare soil conditions, was estimated following Wright (1982) and
Allen et al. (1998).
a slight decreasing trend with time. Slight variations of VI within
the plateau around the trend line, can be a result of environmen-
tal and atmospheric conditions as well as changes in canopy and
surface conditions. The vegetation cover peaked between DOY 180
and DOY 190, remaining fairly constant for the rest of the eld cam-
paign. Both vegetation indices followed the vegetative growth quite
well. The observed decrease in the VI on DOY 190 was probably due
to the decrease in leaf area resulting from the mechanical pruning
of the vines that occurred around DOY 187. The NDVI appeared
to be more sensitive than the SAVI to wet soil surface, presenting
lower values after the irrigation events on DOY 199 and 215.
Once the canopy reached the maximum vegetative develop-
ment as a result of the mechanical pruning, no changes occurred
in the canopy architecture, because no new shoots, leaves or stems
were further observed. The slow decrease of VI after peak vege-
tation could be due to leaf maturity and aging, as described for
other crops (Heilman et al., 1982) and shadow enlarge (Jiang et al.,
2006) as consequence of changes in the zenith angle. The effect of
row direction in the ground shaded area were simulated using the
model proposed by Oyarzun et al. (2007) and no substantial differ-
ences were found at satellite acquisition time. According with this
simulation, changes in the sun declination during the date of the
year has greater effect in the shadow enlargement.
3.3. Kcbrf modeled from vegetation indices
Kcbrf has usually been modeled by means of a linear relationship
established between VI and Kcb measured during the vegetative
growth stage (Cuesta et al., 2005; Gonzlez-Piqueras, 2006). Neale
et al. (1989) proposed the development of this relationship by
means of linear scaling relating the average NDVI of dry tilled bare
soil for the site with the Kcb value for dry bare soil and the average
maximum NDVI value for the site (at effective cover) with the Kcb
value at effective cover. Following this procedure, specic equa-
tions can be developed for diverse crops in different agricultural
areas.
Since the relationship between VI and crop coefcient were
based on the basal crop coefcient Kcb , that is dened as the ratio
of the crop evapotranspiration over the reference evapotranspira-
tion when the soil surface is dry but transpiration is occurring at
potential rate (Allen et al., 1998), only the dates with minimum soil
evaporation and free of water stress in the root zone could to be
used in the VIKcbrf model development. In this way, only the data
after a minimum of 4 days following an irrigation or rain event
were used, with the goal of reducing the evaporation component
from bare soil. The selected dates that met these criteria and used
to obtain this relationship were DOY 126, 151, 174, 183, 190, 206,
 I. Campos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 98 (2010) 4554 51

Table 4
Summary of some Kcb VI relationships reported in the literature (Eqs. (7) and (11) are modied for grass as the reference surface).

Equation Author Crop

(7) Kcbrf = 1.36 NDVI 0.06 Bausch and Neale (1987) Corn
(8) Kcbrf = 1.46 NDVI 0.26 Choundhury et al. (1994) Theoretical approach
(9) Kcbrf = 1.416 SAVI + 0.017 Bausch (1993) Corn
(10) Kcbrf = 1.69 SAVI 0.16 Choundhury et al. (1994) Theoretical approach
(11) Kcbrf = 1.587 SAVI + 0.005 Jayanthi et al. (2007) Potato

247 and 270. Linear relationships between Kcb and both NDVI and
SAVI resulted in high coefcients of determination (Fig. 4), although
the scarce number of points available at lower values will require
further research for conrmation.
The similarity between the Kcbrf VI relationships described
herein and other reported equations (Table 4) albeit for different
crops, are signicant although small differences for slope and inter-
ception can be observed. For the full developed vines values of NDVI
and SAVI found here, Kcbrf from empirical equations (Bausch, 1993;
Bausch and Neale, 1987; Jayanthi et al., 2007) showed in Table 4
ranges between 0.45 and 0.50, conrming the similarity between
the reported empirical relationships, at least for the medium range
of vegetation indices.
The use of SAVI did not signicantly increase the accuracy of the
model. According to the analysis by Huete (1988), the use of SAVI Fig. 5. ETmeasured and ETa throughout the 2007 grape growing season along with ET0 .
with crops having low vegetation cover reduced substantially the Observe the increases of ETmeasured and ETa after irrigation or rain events.

effects of the soil background and improved the linearity between

the VI and biophysical parameters. In the case of this experiment,
the main possible reason for soil background reectance variabil-
ity would be related to wetting due to irrigation. However, due to
the use of trickle irrigation, the portion of wetted soil is small com-
pared to the row spacing and mostly occulted by the vegetation
canopy when viewed from nadir and apparently does not intro-
duce signicant variability in the spectral response at eld scales
if the satellite image is taken a few days after an irrigation event.
However the use of the NDVI based model operationally could lead
to increased error if applied on days with wet soil due to irrigation
and especially rain, as in the latter case the entire inter-row soil sur-
face would be wet. Besides these considerations, the slightly higher
r2 of the NDVI model presented herein lead us to apply the water
balance model using Kcbrf based on the NDVI relationship. For the
dates when satellite images were not available, Kcbrf was linearly
interpolated between the previous and the following image date.
3.4. Comparison between measured and modeled crop
evapotranspiration
Following the dual crop coefcient approach and assimilat-
ing the Kcbrf modeled from reectance data in the computation,
actual crop evapotranspiration, ETa , was calculated as the product
of Kcrf and ET0 . The results match closely the evolution of ETmeasured
including the increases after irrigations and rains that produce
short-term increments in ET due to bare soil evaporation (Fig. 5).
ETmeasured and ETa are strongly inuenced by the increases in vege-
tation development as well as daily and seasonal ET0 increases and
decreases.
Total modeled water consumption during the growing season
was 324 mm resulting in a difference of 15 mm, or 5% of ETmeasured .
root zone. The irrigation application of 22 mm every 12 days, except
at the beginning and at the end of the season, imposed a cyclical
variation of Kc . After each irrigation event, a sudden increase in the
Kc can be observed due to the presence of increased soil evaporation
with a subsequent dry down period and decrease in the Kc lasting
typically 34 days. The largest differences between measured and
modeled Kc occurred on days after rain or irrigation events, indi-
cating that the bare soil evaporation model could be improved. The
close agreement outside of these periods reinforces the validity of
the approach based on the reectance based basal crop coefcient
and conrms the methodology used in its development.
During the period between DOY 167 and DOY 199, the absence
of soil evaporation along with well-watered conditions in the root
zone coincided with the period when the grapes reached their peak
vegetative growth before being pruned. The measured Kc reached
0.5 during this period and reduced to 0.47 after pruning. The main
error source was in the soil surface evaporation model used for
Ke estimation which presently does not accurately reproduce the
measured values. The proposed modication relative to wet and
exposed area increased the precision of the results, but some dif-
ferences appear during the dry down period after irrigation or rain
events.

3.5. Comparison between measured and modeled crop coefcient

The Kc followed the grape canopy growth increasing its value

from DOY 120 to DOY 187 (Fig. 6), when the vegetation growth was
stopped due to mechanical pruning. Variability in Kc after that date
was due to either the increased soil evaporation component after Fig. 6. Estimated Kc throughout the season along with modeled Kcrf using the
irrigations and rains or decreases due to water limitations in the reectance-based basal crop coefcient approach.
52 I. Campos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 98 (2010) 4554
Fig. 7. Comparison between measured and modeled evapotranspiration. (a) Daily crop coefcient with a minimum of 4 days after irrigation or rain; (b) weekly mean crop
coefcient for the whole data; (c) daily evapotranspiration with a minimum of 4 days after irrigation or rain; and (d) weekly cumulated evapotranspiration for the whole
data.
However, modeled crop coefcient and crop evapotranspiration
using data from periods after a minimum of 4 days from an irriga-
tion or rain event reproduce measured values and show a linear
correlation near the 1:1 line (Fig. 7). The high coefcient of deter-
mination of the Kcbrf VI linear relationship results from the parallel
trends that both parameters follow during the grape vines vegeta-
tive growth stage; a fact that has been conrmed for other crops
in studies using this methodology such as Neale et al. (1989) and
Jayanthi et al. (2007). In addition, comparisons of weekly values of
cumulative ET, a common time period used in irrigated agriculture,
shows a good agreement between measured and modeled values.
3.6. Practical applications and limitations
The empirical Kcb VI linear relationships in grapes as presented
in Fig. 4 are similar to those previously found for herbaceous crops
with higher LAI and cover values at different sites as shown in
Table 4. Further research is needed to conrm if the relationship
developed for grapes herein can be used with grape canopies that
attain higher LAI values. Previously developed Kc vs. NDVI rela-
tionships for other crops in the same region also exhibit similar
coefcients; an indication of the reliability and temporal stability of
these relationships (Cuesta et al., 2005; Gonzlez-Piqueras, 2006).
Our ndings indicate that the Kcbrf value of a canopy expresses
the maximum (potential) value of the ratio ET/ET0 that this canopy
could reach under dry surface soils, when the overall canopy con-
ditions are optimal. Water stress, diseases, soil salinity, etc. could
be causes for a reduction of its maximum rate. For grapes and other
fruit trees with large stomatal control, the ratio ET/ET0 could also
be dependent on the load of fruit supported by the plant for the
same foliage development. In the data here presented we con-
sider that the load of fruit was well balanced with the foliage
development, because the experimental plot was oriented to max-
imize the production and quality. The approach of using Kcbrf from
remote sensing coupled with a soil water balance, to calculate ETa
requires knowledge of water stress functions and bare soil evapo-
ration modeling. Probably in some cases, with trees specially, the
water stress functions would need to be more complex than the
method described in the FAO56 approach, and more inputs would
be required. Advances on bare soil evaporation modeling also need
to be developed.
The Kcbrf procedure combined with surface energy balance mod-
els using remote sensing could lead to interesting solutions. Surface
energy balance (SEB) models couple the canopy/soil root zone con-
tinuum and the atmosphere through the radiometric temperature.
In a comparison of both methodologies (Gonzalez-Dugo et al., 2009)
found similar accuracies between both approaches, so a synergistic
combination of these approaches (Rubio et al., 2006) should be a
future research line for tackling water stress functions.
The Kcb ET0 approach decouples canopy and atmosphere. The
temporal evolution of Kcb describes the canopy growth along its
growing season. The curve could be approximated by a smooth,
continuous, function, opening the possibility to interpolate this
parameter between adjacent dates due to its great stability in com-
parison with the great variability of ET values. A good example of
the stability of Kcb is shown in Fig. 3
Though the relationships in this paper were developed using
Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper imagery, the use of virtual satellite con-
stellations (Martinez-Beltran et al., 2009) based around multiple
and compatible satellite sensors and platforms open the possibility
of increasing single platform temporal resolution, which is a serious
hindrance for operational applications. Since the most recent and
 I. Campos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 98 (2010) 4554
future earth observation platforms in orbit are focused in the visible
and near infrared spectrum, this could improve the application of
the proposed methodology by increasing the temporal and spatial
resolution provided by Landsat 5-TM. The compatibility between
future sensors in orbit and the spectral response of Thematic Map-
per sensor used in this paper should be tested. Some advances have
been made by comparing TM bands with bands from other orbital
sensors at the reectance level (Steven et al., 2003) or comparing
VI (Martinez-Beltran et al., 2009).
4. Conclusions
The results conrm that crop coefcients derived from canopy
reectance based vegetation indices is a simple, tested, and valid
tool for the assessment of water requirements of irrigated vine-
yards. The use of a Kcbrf derived from VI allows for the consideration
of particular characteristics of crop development along of the grow-
ing season and the use of Ke derived from daily soil water balance
allows the estimation of the soil evaporation. The good agreement
obtained between modeled and measured values of ET conrm the
validity of the water balance model.
The Kcbrf VI relationships developed were based on few
remotely sensed inputs during the vegetative state of growth
due to clouds affecting satellite image acquisition. Additional data
obtained either through eld radiometry would have been desir-
able and should be a consideration in future experiments with
grapes, to conrm the relationships obtained herein. The Kcbrf VI
relationships should also be tested with different varieties that
attain higher leaf area as well as under different production and
irrigation management schemes.
This methodology opens up the possibility of estimating actual
ET for grapes over large areas using satellite imagery and will add
to the suite of crops for which this methodology is available.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the projects EBHE, CGL2008-
04047, funded by the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacin (MICINN,
Spain), and PLEIADeS co-nanced by the European Communities
(Contract GOCE 037095). Christopher Neale was also supported by
the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station. The authors are particu-
larly grateful to the farmers, especially to Mr. Fernando Calera, for
their help, permission and collaboration during the data collection
phase. The authors also wish to thank the anonymous reviewers
their useful and constructive comments and suggestions.
References
Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 1998. Crop evapotranspiration: Guide-
lines for computing crop requirements. Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 56,
FAO, Rome, Italy.
Bausch, W.C., 1993. Soil background effects on reectance-based crop coefcients
for corn. Remote Sensing of Environment 46, 213222.
Bausch, W.C., Neale, C.M.U., 1987. Crop coefcients derived from reected canopy
radiation: a concept. Transactions of the ASAE 30, 703709.
Bowen, I.S., 1926. The ratio of heat losses by conduction and by evaporation from
any water surface. Physics Review 27, 779787.
Bucks, D.A., French, O.F., Nakayama, F.S., Fangmeier, D.D., 1985. Trickle irrigation
management for grape production. In: 1. Proceedings of the Third International
Drip/Trickle Irrigation Congress, American Society of Agricultural Engineers,
Fresno, CA, pp. 204211.
Cuesta, A., Montoro, A., Jochum, A.M., Lpez, P., Calera, A., 2005. Metodologa opera-
tiva para la obtencin del coeciente de cultivo desde imgenes de satlite. ITEA
101, 91100.
Chander, G., Markham, B.L., Barsi, J.A., 2007. Revised Landsat-5 Thematic Mapper
radiometric calibration. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters 4, 490494.
Choundhury, B.J., Ahmed, N.U., Idso, S.B., Reginato, R.J., Daughtry, C.S., 1994. Rela-
tions between evaporation coefcients and vegetation indices studied by model
simulations. Remote Sensing of Environment 50, 117.
Doorenbos, J., Pruitt, W.O., 1977. Guidelines for predicting crop water requiere-
ments. Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 24, FAO, Rome, Italy.
53
Duchemin, B., Hadria, R., Er-Raki, S., Boulet, G., Maisongrande, P., Chehbouni, A.,
Escadafal, R., Ezzahar, J., Hoedjes, J.C.B., Kharrou, M.H., Khabba, S., Mougenot, B.,
Olioso, A., Rodriguez, J.C., Simmoneaux, V., 2006. Monitoring wheat phenology
and irrigation in central Morocco: on the use of relationships between evapo-
transpiration, crop coefcients, leaf area index and remotely-sensed vegetation
indices. Agricultural Water Management 79, 127.
Er-Raki, S., Chehbouni, A., Guemouria, N., Duchemin, B., Ezzahar, J., Hadria, R., 2007.
Combining FAO-56 model and ground-based remote sensing to estimate water
consumptions of wheat crops in a semi-arid region. Agricultural Water Manage-
ment 87, 4154.
Evans, R.G., Spayd, S.E., Wample, R.L., Kroeger, M.W., Mahan, M.O., 1993. Water
use of Vitis vinifera grapes in Washington. Agricultural Water Management 23,
109124.
Gonzlez-Dugo, M.P., Mateos, L., 2008. Spectral vegetation indices for benchmarking
water productivity of irrigated cotton and sugarbeet crops. Agricultural Water
Management 95, 4858.
Gonzalez-Dugo, M.P., Neale, C.M.U., Mateos, L., Kustas, W.P., Prueger, J.H., Anderson,
M.C., Li, F., 2009. A comparison of operational remote sensing-based models for
estimating crop evapotranspiration. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 149,
18431853.
Gonzlez-Piqueras, J., 2006. Crop Evapotranspiration by means of remote sensing
determination of the crop coefcient. Regional Scale Application: 08-29 Mancha
Oriental aquifer. Universitat de Valncia.
Guanter, L., Estells, V., Moreno, J., 2007. Spectral calibration and atmospheric
correction of ultra-ne spectral and spatial resolution remote sensing data.
Application to CASI-1500 data. Remote Sensing of Environment 109, 5465.
Haselgrove, L., Botting, D., van Heeswijck, R., Hj, P.B., Dry, P.R., Ford, C., Iland, P.G.,
2000. Canopy microclimate and berry composition: the effect of bunch exposure
on the phenolic composition of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Shiraz grape berries. Australian
Journal of Agricultural Research 6, 141149.
Heilman, J.L., Heilman, W.E., Moore, D.G., 1982. Evaluating the crop coefcient using
spectral reectance. Agronomy Journal 74, 967971.
Hillel, D., 1998. Environmental Soil Physics. Academic Press, San Diego.
Huete, A.R., 1988. A soil-adjusted vegetation index (SAVI). Remote Sensing of Envi-
ronment 25, 5370.
Hunsaker, D.J., Pinter, P.J., Barnes, E.M., Kimball, B.A., 2003. Estimating cotton evapo-
transpiration crop coefcients with a multiespectral vegetation index. Irrigation
Science 22, 95104.
IGN, 1992. Instituto Geogrco Nacional. Mapa de Suelos. Sistema Espanol
de Informacin de Suelos sobre Internet, http://www.microleis.com/
mimam/seisnet.htm.
INM, 2004. Instituto Nacional de Meteorologa. Gua resumida del clima en Espana,
19712000, Madrid.
Jackson, D.I., Lombard, P.B., 1993. Environmental and management practices affect-
ing grape composition and wine quality. A review. American Journal of Enology
and Viticulture 44, 409430.
Jayanthi, H., Neale, C.M.U., Wright, J.L., 2007. Development and validation of canopy
reectance-based crop coefcient for potato. Agricultural Water Management
88, 235246.
Jiang, Z., Huete, A.R., Chen, J., Chen, Y., Li, J., Yan, G., Zhang, X., 2006. Analysis of NDVI
and scaled difference vegetation index retrievals of vegetation fraction. Remote
Sensing of Environment 101, 366378.
Kaimal, J.C., Finnigan, J.J., 1994. Atmospheric Boundary Layer Flows: Their Structure
and Measurement. Oxford University Press, New York.
Martinez-Beltran, C., Jochum, M.A.O., Calera, A., Melia, J., 2009. Multisensor com-
parison of NDVI for a semi-arid environment in Spain. International Journal of
Remote Sensing 30, 13551384.
Massman, W.J., 2000. A simple method for estimating frequency response correc-
tions for eddy covariance systems. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 104,
185198.
Mauder, M., Foken, T., Clement, R., Elbers, J.A.E.W., Grnwald, T., Heusinkveld,
B., Kolle, O., 2007. Quality control of CarboEurope ux data - Part 2:
Inter-comparison of eddy-covariance software. Biogeosciences 5, 4067
4099.
Montero, F.J., Meli, J., Brasa, A., Segarra, D., Cuesta, A., Lanjeri, S., 1999. Assess-
ment of vine development according to available water resources by using
remote sensing in La Mancha, Spain. Agricultural Water Management 40, 363
375.
Montoro, A., Lpez Urrea, R., Manas, F., Lpez Fuster, P., Fereres, E., 2008. Evaporation
of Grapevines measured by a weighing Lysimeter in La Mancha, Spain. Acta
Horticulture (ISHS) 792, 459466.
Neale, C.M.U., Bausch, W.C., Heerman, D.F., 1989. Development of reectance-based
crop coefcients for corn. Transactions of the ASAE 32, 18911899.
Oliver, H.R., Sene, K.J., 1992. Energy and water balances of developing vines. Agri-
cultural and Forest Meteorology 61, 167185.
Oyarzun, R.A., Stckle, C.O., Whiting, M.D., 2007. A simple approach to modeling radi-
ation interception by fruit-tree orchards. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
142, 1224.
Pellegrino, A., Goz, E., Lebon, E., Wery, J., 2006. A model-based diagnosis tool to eval-
uate the water stress experienced by grapevine in eld sites. European Journal
of Agronomy 25, 4959.
Pellegrino, A., Lebon, E., Voltz, M., Wery, J., 2004. Relationships between plant and
soil water status in vine (Vitis vinifera L.). Plant Soil 266, 129142.
Rafn, E., Contor, B., Ames, D., 2008. Evaluation of a method for estimating irrigated
crop-evapotranspiration coefcients from remotely sensed data in Idaho. Jour-
nal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering-ASCE 134, 722729.
54 I. Campos et al. / Agricultural Water Management 98 (2010) 4554
Rouse, J.W., Haas, R.W., Shell, J.A., Deering, D.W., Harlan, J.C., 1973. Monitoring
the vernal advancement and retrogradation of natural vegetation. NASA/GSFC,
Greenbelt, USA, Final Report.
Rubio, E., Colin, J., DUrso, G., Trezza, R., Allen, R., Calera, A., Gonzalez, J., Jochum,
A., Menenti, M., Tasumi, M., Kelly, C., Vuolo, F., 2006. Golden Day Comparison of
Methods to Retrieve ET (Kc-NDVI, Kc-analytical, MSSEBS, METRIC), Earth Obser-
vation for Vegetation Monitoring and Water Management. AIP, Naples (Italy),
pp. 193200.
Saxton, K.E., Rawls, W.F., Romberger, J.S., Papendick, R.I., 1986. Estimating gener-
alized soilwater characteristics from texture. Soil Science Society of American
Journal 50, 10311036.
Schuepp, P.H., Leclerc, M.Y., MacPherson, J.I., Desjardins, R.L., 1990. Footprint pre-
diction of scalar uxes from analytical solutions of the diffusion equation.
Boundary-Layer Meteorology 50, 355373.
Singh, R., Irmak, A., 2009. Estimation of crop coefcients using satellite remote
sensing. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering-ASCE 135, 597608.
Stannard, D.I., 1997. A theoretically based determination of Bowen-ratio fetch
requirements. Boundary-Layer Meteorology 83, 375406.
Steven, M.D., Malthus, T.J., Baret, F., Xu, H., Chopping, M.J., 2003. Intercalibration of
vegetation indices from different sensors system. Remote Sensing of Environ-
ment 88, 412422.
Teixeira, A.H.d.C., Bastiaanssen, W.G.M., Bassoi, L.H., 2007. Crop water parameters
of irrigated wine and table grapes to support water productivity analysis in the
So Francisco river basin, Brazil. Agricultural Water Management 94, 3142.
Twine, T.E., Kustasb, W.P., Normanc, J.M., Cookd, D.R., Housere, P.R., Meyersf, T.P.,
Pruegerg, J.H., Starksh, P.J., Wesely, M.L., 2000. Correcting eddy-covariance
ux understimates over a grassland. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 103,
229317.
Webb, E.K., Pearman, G.I., Leuning, R., 1980. Correction of ux measurements for
density effects due to heat and watervapor transfer. Quarterly Journal of the
Royal Meteorological Society 106, 85100.
Williams, L.E., Ayars, J.E., 2005. Grapevine water use and the crop coefcient are
linear functions of the shaded area measured beneath the canopy. Agricultural
and Forest Meteorology 132, 201211.
Wright, J.L., 1982. New evapotranspiration crop coefcients. Journal of the Irrigation
and Drainage Division 108, 5774.