参考作物蒸散模型对比分析及评价  

Evaluation on models for reference crop evapotranspiration

作　　者：张方敏[1,2] 申双和[1,2] 金之庆[3] 

机构地区：[1]南京信息工程大学应用气象学院,南京210044 [2]南京信息工程大学气象灾害省部共建教育部重点实验室,南京210044 [3]江苏省农业科学院农业资源与环境研究所,南京210014

出　　处：《气象科学》2009年第6期749-754,共6页Journal of the Meteorological Sciences

基　　金：国家自然科学基金资助项目(40675067);江苏省研究生创新计划项目(CX09B-222Z)

摘　　要：利用山东省6个气象台站45 a(1960—2004年)的逐日气象资料并选用7种参考作物蒸散模型,分别计算了上述各地的参考作物蒸散,对模型结果进行时空分布对比分析;进而以FAO推荐的Penman-Monteith模型为对照,利用最小一乘法对其余6种模型进行优化并对优化前后的模型进行时空比较。结果表明:Makkink模型在6个台站的时空分布模拟效果均最好,Mass-transfer模型在7—8月明显偏低,NetRad iation模型各站全年基本都偏高;根据不同月份的相对偏差情况,采用最小一乘法进行分月优化,优化后的模型预测月参考作物蒸散标准误差小于5 mm,平均相对误差小于8.5%,台站的年参考作物蒸散相对误差也基本小于10%,说明这些含参数较少的模型经优化后基本上可用,当资料缺损时不失为Penman-Monteith模型的替代模型。The long-term changes of reference crop evapotranspiration （ET0） were estimated over the period 1960-2004 at six meteorological stations in Shandong Province based on seven different models driven by routine daily meteorological date. Firstly, the variability of predicted ET0 over the space and time scale has been compared, then the other six models were optimized by means of Least Absolute Deviation method according to Penman-Monteith model recommended by FAO and comparison values of ET0 between pre- and post-optimization. The results showed that Makkink model was the best of all, while Mass transfer model underestimated much from June to August, and Net Radiation model overestimated throughout the year at all the stations. After optimization, models gave a better estimation for monthly ET0 with a mean relative deviation error （MRE） less than 8.5% , and less than 10% for yearly ET0. Therefore, the models perhaps can be used instead where and/or when meteorological data were absent.

关 键 词：参考作物蒸散 相对偏差 最小一乘法 优化 

分 类 号：S161.4[农业科学—农业气象学]