A systematic evaluation of 15 actual evapotranspiration formulations within conceptual hydrological models

Abstract. Actual evapotranspiration (AET) is a major component of the water balance, yet it is rarely assessed for accuracy in conceptual rainfall-runoff models that are often calibrated to match streamflow only. Inaccurate representation of underlying AET processes may cause models to incorrectly simulate long-term changes in partitioning between AET and streamflow, even if this partitioning was relatively accurate during calibration. To investigate AET representation within conceptual hydrological models, we systematically tested 15 evapotranspiration (ET) equations that convert potential evapotranspiration (PET) and soil moisture to AET. The 15 equations represent common practice, having been sourced from a published comprehensive review of conceptual hydrological models. Each of these 15 formulations were trialled within three conceptual hydrological models (GR4J, Simhyd and Vic). Following multi-objective calibration, we evaluated performance across both streamflow and flux tower AET measurements at seven catchments from a range of Australian climates. A small number of AET equations outperformed the rest, with one equation standing out, which uses a non-linear relationship with soil moisture storage and can scale down AET such that it cannot equal PET. This equation achieved a higher objective function value for both AET and streamflow and accurately captured evapotranspiration signatures. However, even this equation showed limitations in reproducing observed AET, suggesting persistent issues across commonly used formulations. These shortcomings may reflect missing vegetation-related dynamics and other simplifications. Our findings highlight the importance of ET equation selection in modelling AET and streamflow, and we recommend the identified equation as a promising option for future Australian studies. Further work is needed to test equations for consistency with known processes to improve the physical realism of conceptual hydrological models.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Hydrology and earth system sciences
Published
2026-07-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-30-4509-2026
Primary Topic
Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A systematic evaluation of 15 actual evapotranspiration formulations within conceptual hydrological models

Clare Stephens, Murray Cameron Peel, Keirnan Fowler, Gabrielle Burns
Hydrology and earth system sciences
Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
article

A systematic evaluation of 15 actual evapotranspiration formulations within conceptual hydrological models

Clare Stephens, Murray Cameron Peel, Keirnan Fowler, Gabrielle Burns
article en

Abstract

Abstract. Actual evapotranspiration (AET) is a major component of the water balance, yet it is rarely assessed for accuracy in conceptual rainfall-runoff models that are often calibrated to match streamflow only. Inaccurate representation of underlying AET processes may cause models to incorrectly simulate long-term changes in partitioning between AET and streamflow, even if this partitioning was relatively accurate during calibration. To investigate AET representation within conceptual hydrological models, we systematically tested 15 evapotranspiration (ET) equations that convert potential evapotranspiration (PET) and soil moisture to AET. The 15 equations represent common practice, having been sourced from a published comprehensive review of conceptual hydrological models. Each of these 15 formulations were trialled within three conceptual hydrological models (GR4J, Simhyd and Vic). Following multi-objective calibration, we evaluated performance across both streamflow and flux tower AET measurements at seven catchments from a range of Australian climates. A small number of AET equations outperformed the rest, with one equation standing out, which uses a non-linear relationship with soil moisture storage and can scale down AET such that it cannot equal PET. This equation achieved a higher objective function value for both AET and streamflow and accurately captured evapotranspiration signatures. However, even this equation showed limitations in reproducing observed AET, suggesting persistent issues across commonly used formulations. These shortcomings may reflect missing vegetation-related dynamics and other simplifications. Our findings highlight the importance of ET equation selection in modelling AET and streamflow, and we recommend the identified equation as a promising option for future Australian studies. Further work is needed to test equations for consistency with known processes to improve the physical realism of conceptual hydrological models.

Hydrology and earth system sciencesVol. 30(14)
The University of Melbourne (AU), Western Sydney University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 100%
Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.