小时与日尺度PM公式的参照作物腾发量及其水稻单作物系数值差异

详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |

英文篇名：Difference in reference crop evapotranspiration calculated by PM equation and the corresponding single crop coefficient of rice between hourly scale and daily scale 作者：王可纯 ; 蔡少杰 ; 卫琦 ; 吕玉平 ; 廖林仙 ; 徐俊增 英文作者：WANG Kechun;CAI Shaojie;WEI Qi;L Yuping;LIAO Linxian;XU Junzeng;Key Laboratory of Efficient Irrigation-Drainage and Agricultural Soil-Water Environment in Southern China,Hohai University;State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering,Hohai University; 关键词：ASCE ; PM公式 ; FAO56 ; PM公式 ; 不同时间尺度 ; 参考作物腾发量 ; 作物系数 ; 水稻 英文关键词：ASCE penman-monteith formula;;FAO56 penman-monteith formula;;different temporal scales;;reference crop evapotranspiration;;crop coefficients;;rice 中文刊名：XBSZ 英文刊名：Journal of Water Resources and Water Engineering 机构：河海大学南方地区高效灌排与农业水土环境教育部重点实验室;河海大学水文水资源与水利工程科学国家重点实验室; 出版日期：2019-02-15 出版单位：水资源与水工程学报 年：2019 期：v.30;No.143 基金：江苏水利科技项目(2015089) 语种：中文; 页：XBSZ201901037 页数：7 CN：01 ISSN：61-1413/TV 分类号：250-256

摘要

以昆山试验站2012-2013年自动气象站观测的小时气象资料为依据,分别采用ASCE PM公式和FAO56PM公式计算小时ET_0,在对比两种小时ET_0计算结果基础上,通过逐小时累积求和得到日ET_0值(分别记作ET_(0-dhA)和ET_(0-dhF)),进而与日尺度参照作物腾发量ET_0(记作ET_(0-d))进行对比,在明确ET_(0-d),ET_(0-dhA)和ET_(0-dhF)差异的基础上,分析了基于不同ET_0确定的水稻单作物系数差异(分别记为K_(c-d)、K_(c-dhA)与K_(c-dhF))。结果表明:在水稻不同生育阶段内,小时ET_0值大致呈抛物线型日变化,在中午时ET_0达到最大,午夜则最低; 2种PM公式计算得到的小时ET_0值存在微小差异,差异范围在-0. 02～0. 5 mm/h内,白天ASCE PM公式计算值偏大,夜间则无明显规律。在日尺度上,ET_(0-d),ET_(0-dhA)和ET_(0-dhF)三者之间具有良好的线性关系,大小关系表现为:ET_(0-dhA)> ET_(0-d)> ET_(0-dhF)。总体上,由实测日腾发量ET_a求得的节水灌溉水稻单作物系数大于按照FAO推荐方法确定的作物系数值,且采用不同日ET_0计算结果得到的水稻K_c值之间的大小关系为:K_(c-dhA)        Based on the hourly meteorological data collected by an automatic meteorological station in Kunshan Experimental Station during 2012-2013,hourly ET_0 were calculated by ASCE PM and FAO56 PM formulas equations separately to show the difference in hourly ET_0 calculated by two different equations. Then the hourly ET_0 were summed up to obtain the daily ET_0 ( termed as ET_(0-dhA) and ET_(0-dhF)) and compared to the daily ET_0 calculated by PM equation at daily scale( ET_(0-d)). Differences among ET_(0-d),ET_(0-dhA) and ET_(0-dhF) were discussed,as well as the difference among the single crop coefficient of rice based on daily ET_0 determined by different procedures. The results showed that hourly ET_0 varied in parabolic shape,with the maximum observed at noon and minimum at midnight. Hourly ET_0 were slightly different between two methods,with the difference fell in range of -0. 02 ～ 0. 5 mm/h. Hourly ET_0 by ASCE PM were found slightly higher than by FAO56 PM in daytime. Daily ET_0 were highly correlated to each other,and ranked in sequence of ET_(0-dhA)> ET_(0-d)> ET_(0-dhF). Local calibrated single crop coefficient K_c of rice were higher than the value determined following the procedure by FAO,and ranked in sequence of K_(c-dhA)< K_(c-d)< K_(c-dhF),with the difference among them less than 5%.

引文

[1]PEREIRA A R,PRUITT W O.Adaptation of the Thomthwaite scheme for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration[J].Agricultural Water Management,2004,64:251-257.
    [2]张倩,蔡焕杰,魏新光,等.基于主成分分析的参考作物腾发量预测研究[J].节水灌溉,2010(12):64-66.
    [3]张波,谷晓平,古书鸿,等.近55年贵州省潜在蒸散量变化特征及影响因子分析[J].水资源与水工程学报,2017,28(3):20-26.
    [4]甄自强,黄金柏,王斌,等.黄土高原北部淤地坝区域土壤水分模拟及水分有效性——以六道沟流域为例[J].水资源与水工程学报,2016,27(3):226-232+236.
    [5]ALLEN R G,PEREIRA L S,RAES D,et al.Crop evapotranspiration:Guidelines for computing crop water requirements[R].Rome:Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,Irrigation and Drainage Paper No.56,1998.
    [6]SNYDER R L,PEDRAS C,MONTAZAR A,et al.Advances in ET-based landscape irrigation management[J].Agricultural Water Management,2015,147:187-197.
    [7]RANA G,KATERJI N.Measurement and estimation of actual evapotranspiration crop coefficients in the field under Mediterranean climate:a review.2000,13(2-3):125-153.
    [8]BERENGENA J,GAVILN P.Reference evapotranspiration estimation in a highly advective semiarid environment[J].Journal of Irrigation&Drainage Engineering,2005,131(2):147-163.
    [9]DE BRUIN H A R,HARTOGENSIS O K,ALLEN R G,et al.Regional advection perturbations in an irrigated desert(RAPID)experiment[J].Theoretical&Applied Climatology,2005,80(2-4):143-152.
    [10]徐先英,孙保平,丁国栋,等.干旱荒漠区典型固沙灌木液流动态变化及其对环境因子的响应[J].生态学报,2008,28(3):895-905.
    [11]徐俊增,彭世彰,丁加丽,等.基于蒸渗仪实测数据的日参考作物蒸发腾发量计算方法评价[J].水利学报,2010,41(12):1497-1505.
    [12]孙庆宇,佟玲,张宝忠,等.参考作物蒸发蒸腾量计算方法在海河流域的适用性[J].农业工程学报,2010,26(11):68-72.
    [13]ASCE-EWRI.The ASCE standardized reference evapotranspiration equation[R].Task Committee on Standardization of Reference Evapotranspiration.New York,USA:Tchnical Committee Report,2005.
    [14]ITENFISU D,ELLIOT R L,ALLEN R G,et al.Comparison of reference evapotranspiration calculations as a part of the Drainage Engineering,ASCE,2003,129(6):440-448.
    [15]苏春宏,陈亚新,徐冰.ET0计算公式的最新进展与普适性评估[J].水科学进展,2008,19(1):129-136.
    [16]卢晓鹏,段顺琼,马显莹,等.单双作物系数法计算玉米需水量的对比研究[J].节水灌溉,2012(11):18-21.
    [17]吴慧蓉,崔远来,高明利.作物系数影响因素分析[J].节水灌溉,2016(8):149-152+156.
    [18]ALLEN R G,PEREIRA L S,HOWELL T A,et al.E-vapotranspiration information reporting:I.Factors governing measurement accuracy[J].Agricultural Water Management,2011,98(6):899-920.
    [19]金菊良,侯志强,蒋尚明,等.基于单作物系数和遗传算法的受旱胁迫下大豆蒸发蒸腾量估算[J].黑龙江大学工程学报,2017,8(1):1-10+12.
    [20]强小嫚,蔡焕杰,孙景生,等.陕西关中地区ET0计算公式的适用性评价[J].农业工程学报,2012,28(20):121-127.
    [21]苏春宏,陈亚新,张富仓,等.ET0计算公式在我国半干旱区的实验率定研究[J].人民长江,2009,40(21):91-95.
    [22]徐俊增,彭世彰,张行南,等.两种Penman-Monteith公式计算草坪草参考腾发量的适用性[J].农业工程学报,2009,25(12):32-37.
    [23]PEREIRA L S,ALLEN R G,SMITH M,et al.Crop evapotranspiration estimation with FAO56:Past and future,Agricultural Water Management,2015,147:4-20.
    [24]茆智,李远华,李会昌.逐日作物需水量预测数学模型研究[J].武汉水利电力大学学报,1995,28(3):253-259.