稻田蒸散估算方法及灌溉影响分析
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Estimation Methods of Paddy Field Evapotranspiration and Analysis of Irrigation Impact
  • 作者:马美娟 ; 景元书 ; Leila ; Cudemus ; 李谦
  • 英文作者:MA Meijuan;JING Yuanshu;LEILA Cudemus;LI Qian;Collaborative Innovation Center of Meteorological Disaster Forecasting Warning and Assessment/Key Laboratory of Agricultural Meteorology in Jiangsu;College of Applied Meteorology, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology;
  • 关键词:稻田 ; 蒸散模型 ; 时间尺度 ; 灌溉
  • 英文关键词:paddy fields;;evapotranspiration model;;time scales;;irrigation
  • 中文刊名:GGPS
  • 英文刊名:Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
  • 机构:气象灾害预报预警与评估协同创新中心/江苏省农业气象重点实验室;南京信息工程大学应用气象学院;
  • 出版日期:2017-10-18 08:11
  • 出版单位:灌溉排水学报
  • 年:2018
  • 期:v.37
  • 基金:国家自然科学基金项目(41575111);; 科技部公益性行业专项(GYHY201406025,GYHY200906030)
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:GGPS201802013
  • 页数:7
  • CN:02
  • ISSN:41-1337/S
  • 分类号:85-91
摘要
【目的】寻找合适的蒸散模型及其敏感因子。【方法】以稻田生态系统为研究对象,根据江西省余江县试验区的净辐射、土壤热通量等小气候数据及相关农学观测数据,进行了不同时间尺度3种蒸散模型(Penman-Monteith、Priestley-Taylor和Hargreaves模型)拟合效果的比较以及蒸散对气象因子的敏感性分析,并研究了灌溉对潜在蒸散的影响。【结果】逐日尺度上,Penman-Monteith模型的拟合效果最优,其次为Priestley-Taylor模型,Hargreaves模型较差且低估了实际蒸散值;逐时尺度上,拟合效果较好的是Penman-Monteith模型和Priestley-Taylor模型。【结论】不同时间尺度,蒸散对各个气象因子的敏感性不同,逐日逐时蒸散对净辐射和水汽压较为敏感。不同灌溉处理,Penman-Monteith模型潜在蒸散变化显著,Priestley-Taylor模型变化不明显。
        Evapotranspiration plays an important role in water cycle and water balance system.【Objective】Find the suitable evapotranspiration model and sensitive factors.【Method】According to the net radiation, soil heat flux and microclimate data of the experimental area in Yujiang county of Jiangxi province, we analyzed fitting results of the different evapotranspiration models of time scales, the sensitivity analysis of evapotranspiration to weather elements, and the irrigation effects on potential evapotranspiration.【Result】The results showed that the fitting result of Penman-Monteith was the best, and the next was Priestley-Taylor. The result for Hargreaves was bad and it underestimated the actual evapotranspiration on the daily scale. On the hourly scale, the fitting efficiency of Penman-Monteith and Priestley-Taylor model was better. Evapotranspiration had different sensitivities to meteorological factors on different time scales, and evapotranspiration was more sensitive to net radiation and vapor pressure.【Conclusion】In different irrigation treatments, the potential evapotranspiration of Penman-Monteith model has a significant change, which of Priestley-Taylor model has no obvious change.
引文
[1]ALLEN R G,PEREIRA L S,RAES D,et al.Crop evapotranspiration.Guidelines for computing crop water requirements[M].Rome:FAO,1998.
    [2]贾志军,姬兴杰.三江平原稻田蒸散量模拟研究[J].中国农业气象,2014,35(4):380-388.
    [3]司建华,冯起,张小由,等.植物蒸散耗水量测定方法研究进展[J].水科学进展,2005,16(3):450-459.
    [4]BEZERRA B G,SILVA B B D,BEZERRA J R C,et al.Evapotranspiration and crop coefficient for sprinkler-irrigated cotton crop in Apodi Plateau semiarid lands of Brazil[J].Agricultural Water Management,2012,107(10):86-93.
    [5]SULEIMAN A A,SOLER C M T,HOOGENBOOM G.Determining FAO-56 crop coefficients for peanut under different water stress levels[J].Irrigation Science,2013,31(2):169-178.
    [6]SUMNER D M,JACOBS J M.Utility of Penman-Monteith,Priestley-Taylor,reference evapotranspiration,and pan evaporation methods to estimate pasture evapotranspiration[J].Journal of Hydrology,2005,308(1/4):81-104.
    [7]DONOHUE R J,MCVICAR T R,RODERICK M L.Assessing the ability of potential evaporation formulations to capture the dynamics in evaporative demand within a changing climate[J].Journal of Hydrology,2010,386(1):186-197.
    [8]FISHER J B,WHITTAKER R J,MALHI Y.ET come home:potential evapotranspiration in geographical ecology[J].Global Ecology&Biogeography,2015,20(1):1-18.
    [9]刘斌,胡继超,张雪松,等.稻田逐时蒸散量的测定及其模拟方法的比较[J].灌溉排水学报,2014,33(4):369-373.
    [10]高歌,陈德亮,任国玉,等.1956-2000年中国潜在蒸散量变化趋势[J].地理研究,2006,25(3):378-387.
    [11]刘昌明,张丹.中国地表潜在蒸散发敏感性的时空变化特征分析[J].地理学报,2011,66(5):579-588.
    [12]GONG L,XU C Y,CHEN D,et al.Sensitivity of the Penman-Monteith reference evapotranspiration to key climatic variables in the Changjiang(Yangtze River)basin[J].Journal of Hydrology,2006,329(3/4):620-629.
    [13]李斌,李丽娟,覃驭楚,等.澜沧江流域潜在蒸散发敏感性分析[J].资源科学,2011,33(7):1256-1263.
    [14]王炳亮,李国胜.辽河三角洲不同干湿气候区参考蒸散发敏感因子时空变化[J].地理科学,2013,33(8):993-998.
    [15]韩松俊,刘群昌,胡和平,等.灌溉对景泰灌区年潜在蒸散量的影响[J].水科学进展,2010,21(3):364-369.
    [16]VU S H,WATANABE H,TAKAGI K.Application of FAO-56 for evaluating evapotranspiration in simulation of pollutant runoff from paddy rice field in Japan[J].Agricultural Water Management,2005,76(3):195-210.
    [17]LAGE M,BAMOUH A,KARROU M,et al.Estimation of rice evapotranspiration using a microlysimeter technique and comparison with FAO PenmanMonteith and Pan evaporation methods under Moroccan conditions.[J].Agronomie,2003,23(7):625-631.
    [18]CAI J,LIU Y,LEI T,et al.Estimating reference evapotranspiration with the FAO Penman-Monteith equation using daily weather forecast messages[J].Agricultural&Forest Meteorology,2007,145(1/2):22-35.
    [19]PRIESTLY C H B,TAYLOR R J.On the assessment of surface heat flux and evaporation using large-scale parameters[J].Monthly Weather Review,1972,100(2):81-92.
    [20]HARGREAVES G H,SAMANI Z A.Reference crop evapotranspiration from temperature[J].Applied Engineering in Agriculture,1985,1(2):96-99.
    [21]ZHAN X,KUSTAS W P,HUMES K S.An intercomparison study on models of sensible heat flux over partial canopy surfaces with remotely sensed surface temperature[J].Remote Sensing of Environment,1996,58(3):242-256.
    [22]张劲松,孟平,尹昌君.植物蒸散耗水量计算方法综述[J].世界林业研究,2001,14(2):23-28.
    [23]ZHANG C,YAN H,SHI H,et al.Study of crop coefficient and the ratio of soil evaporation to evapotranspiration in an irrigated maize field in an arid area of Yellow River Basin in China[J].Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics,2013,121(3):207-214.
    [24]杨林山,李常斌,王帅兵,等.洮河流域潜在蒸散发的气候敏感性分析[J].农业工程学报,2014,30(11):102-109.
    [25]鲁向晖,白桦,穆兴民,等.江西省潜在蒸发量变化规律及“蒸发悖论”成因分析[J].生态与农村环境学报,2016,32(4):552-557.
    [26]王立伟,董懿曼,牛凯杰,等.四川省潜在蒸散量敏感系数的时空变化[J].灌溉排水学报,2013,32(5):14-19.
    [27]邹璐,陈涛涛,孔凡丹,等.辽宁省参考作物腾发量的敏感性分析[J].灌溉排水学报,2014,33(1):50-54.
NGLC 2004-2010.National Geological Library of China All Rights Reserved.
Add:29 Xueyuan Rd,Haidian District,Beijing,PRC. Mail Add: 8324 mailbox 100083
For exchange or info please contact us via email.