预测农田水分渗漏和氮素淋失的两种模型比较  

Comparison of water drainage and nitrate leaching calculated by soil water balance model and dynamic process model

作　　者：胡克林[1] 李保国[1] 陈德立[2] R.E.White 

机构地区：[1]中国农业大学土壤和水科学系教育部植物土壤相互作用重点实验室,北京100094 [2]澳大利亚墨尔本大学土地和食品学院

出　　处：《水科学进展》2004年第1期87-93,共7页Advances in Water Science

基　　金：国家重点基础研究发展规划(973)资助项目(G1999011709);中澳合作ACIAR资助项目(LWR1/96/164)~~

摘　　要：以田间试验为基础,分别用平衡模型和动力学模型计算了3个小区农田水分渗漏量和氮素淋失量,并对其结果进行了比较,平衡模型计算的水分渗漏量为191～202mm,氮素淋失量为38～63kg·N/hm2;而用动力学模型计算的水分渗漏量为168～234mm,氮素淋失量为27～53kg·N/hm2。造成结果差异的主要原因是:平衡模型没有考虑向上的水流和非饱和流;而动力学模型同时考虑了二者。动力学模型需要大量的田间实测资料,主要应用于农田氮素循环、定量评价水氮资源利用率、优化水肥管理措施等方面。平衡模型仅需要非常少的资料,就能够得到农田水分渗漏量和氮素淋失量,这对精度要求不太高的农田水肥管理来说,不失为一种好方法。Based on the field data from the three plots of one hectare in Quzhou County on North China Plain,water drainage and nitrate leaching are calculated with a soil water balance model (SWB) and the dynamic process model (DPM). Quantities of water drainage and nitrate leaching calculated by the　SWB method range from 191～202 mm and 38～63 kg·N/hm^2 　in 1998/1999 respectively. When the DPM method 　is used, they range from 168～234　mm and 27～53 kg·N/hm^2 respectively. The　cause　for　the　difference　is　that　the　upword　and　unsaturated　water　flow　is　taken　into　account　by　the　DPM　method,　but　not　by　the　SWB　method.The DPM method needs　lot　of　field data, mainly to study nitrogen cycle in field, assess water and nitrogen usage efficiency and optimize management soil water and nitrogen fertilizer. But　the SWB needs　few field data to calculate the quantities of water drainage and nitrate leaching. The SWB is a good method for management soil water and nitrogen fertilizer in fields without high precision.

关 键 词：动力学模型 水分渗漏 氮素淋失 农田 平衡模型 

分 类 号：S143.1[农业科学—肥料学] S271[农业科学—农业基础科学]