不同ET_(0)计算方法在华北土石山区的适用性评价  

Applicability evaluation of different ET_(0) calculation methods in rocky mountainous areas of North China

作　　者：蒋丽娅 陈静[1] 桑玉强[1] 贾长荣 何春霞[3] 张劲松[3] JIANG Liya;CHEN Jing;SANG Yuqiang;JIA Changrong;HE Chunxia;ZHANG Jinsong(College of Forestry,Henan Agricultural University,Zhengzhou 450002,China;Jiyuan Forestry Workstation,Jiyuan 459000,China;Research Institute of Forestry,Chinese Academy of Forestry/Key Laboratory of Tree Breeding and Cultivation,State Forestry Administration,Beijing 100091,China)

机构地区：[1]河南农业大学林学院,河南郑州450002 [2]济源市林业工作站,河南济源459000 [3]中国林业科学研究院林业研究所/国家林业局林木培育重点实验室,北京100091

出　　处：《河南农业大学学报》2022年第5期830-838,848,共10页Journal of Henan Agricultural University

基　　金：中国林业科学研究院中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费专项(CAFYBB2020SY001);国家科技支撑计划项目(2015BAD07B050602)。

摘　　要：【目的】解决气象数据不足条件下华北土石山区参考作物蒸散量计算方法(ET_(0))的选择问题。【方法】利用河南黄河小浪底地球关键带国家野外观测站2019年和2020年5—11月的逐日气象数据,以Penman-Monteith(PM)方法为标准,对5种ET_(0)计算方法(Hargreaves、Irmark-Allen、Priestley-Taylor、Mc Clound和Penman1963)进行评价,探究其在华北土石山区的适用性。【结果】(1)利用PM方法计算的ET_(0)值变化趋势较为一致,均表现为观测前期(5—7月)较高,后期(8—11月)逐渐下降,2019年和2020年观测期总ET_(0)分别为678.96和539.83 mm,日均值分别为3.17和2.52 mm。5种方法计算的ET_(0)变化趋势与PM方法基本一致,但数值变化较大,其中Irmark-Allen方法(784.81 mm)与PM方法最为接近,Hargreaves方法(2223.08 mm)和Penman1963方法(929.80 mm)偏大,Mc Clound方法(355.50 mm)和Priestley-Taylor方法(211.81 mm)则偏小。(2)各方法与PM方法间均具有极显著相关性。Penman1963方法与PM方法的相关性最强,2019年和2020年决定系数R^(2)分别为0.98和0.99,Hargreaves方法、Priestley-Taylor方法和Irmark-Allen方法R^(2)分别为0.63和0.71、0.56和0.61、0.52和0.62,Mc Clound方法R^(2)最小,仅为0.49和0.45。(3)Penman1963方法和Irmark-Allen方法与PM方法间的误差最小,两者的MAE、RMSE和d分别为1.50 mm·d^(-1)、1.79 mm·d^(-1)、89.03%和1.51 mm·d^(-1)、1.77 mm·d^(-1)、73.48%,表明Penman1963方法和Irmark-Allen方法的精度高,适用于华北土石山区。但因Penman1963方法所需参数较多,计算过程复杂。【结论】综合考虑参数获取、计算简便等因素,选择基于辐射法的Irmark-Allen方法,对于华北土石山区更具有适用性。【Objective】The purpose of the study was to solve the problem of calculating reference crop evapotranspiration in rocky mountainous areas of North China under the conditions of insufficient meteorological data.【Method】Using the daily meteorological data of the National Field Observation Station of Xiaolangdi Earth Key Zone on the Yellow River in Henan Province from May to November in 2019 and 2020,5 ET_(0) calculation methods(Hargreaves,Irmark-Allen,Priestley-Taylor,Mc Clound and Penman1963)were evaluated with the Penman Monteith(PM)method as the standard to explore their applicability in the rocky mountainous areas of North China.【Result】(1)The variation tendencies of ET_(0) calculated by PM method in 2019 and 2020 were relatively consistent,which was higher in the early observation period(May-July),and gradually decreased in the later observation period(AugustNovember).The total ET_(0) values during the observation periods in 2019 and 2020 were 678.54 and 539.46 mm,respectively,with daily mean values of 3.17 and 2.52 mm,respectively.The variation trend of ET_(0) calculated by the above 5 methods was basically consistent with that of the PM method,but the values changes greatly.Among them,the value of Irmark-Allen method(784.81 mm)was the closest to that of the PM method,the values of Hargreaves method(2223.08 mm)and Penman1963 method(929.80 mm)were higher than that of the PM method,while those of the Mc Clound method(355.50 mm)and Priestley-Taylor method(211.81 mm)were smaller than that of the PM method.(2)Significant correlation was found between the 5 methods and the PM method.The strongest correlation was found between Penman1963 and the PM method,and the coefficient of determination R^(2) in 2019 and 2020 was 0.98 and 0.99,respectively.R^(2) in Hargreaves method,Priestley Taylor method and Irmark Allen method were 0.63 and 0.71,0.56 and 0.61,0.52 and 0.62,respectively.R^(2) in Mc Clound method was the smallest,only 0.49 and 0.45.(3)The minimum deviation between Penman1963 as well as Irmark-Allen

关 键 词：华北土石山区 气象因子 参考作物蒸散量 Penman-Monteith方法 误差 适用性 

分 类 号：S274.3[农业科学—农业水土工程]