Please wait a minute...
img img
高级检索
地球科学进展  2010, Vol. 25 Issue (9): 974-980    DOI: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2010.09.0974
研究论文     
基于实测资料对日蒸散发估算模型的比较
刘波1,2,翟建青3,高超2,3,姜彤3,王艳君4
1.河海大学水文水资源学院,江苏南京 210024; 2. 中国科学院南京地理与湖泊研究所湖泊与环境国家重点实验室,江苏南京 210008;
3.中国气象局国家气候中心,北京 100081;4.南京信息工程大学,江苏南京 210044
A Comparison of Daily Actual Evapotranspiration Evaluation Models Based on Field Observational Data
Liu Bo1,2, Zhai Jianqing3, Gao Chao2,3, Jiang Tong3, Wang Yanjun4
1.Department of Hydrology and Water Resource, Hohai University, Nanjing 210024, China;
2. Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, State Key Laboratory of Lake Science and Environment, Nanjing 210008, China;
3. National Climate Center, China Meteorological Administration,Beijing 100081, China;
4. Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China
 全文: PDF(1233 KB)  
摘要:

利用设置于江西省南昌县的新型高精度自动蒸渗仪,于2007年9月1日至2008年8月31日的实测陆面实际蒸散发过程,检验了面蒸散发互补关系模型CRAE (Complementary Relationship Areal Evapotranspiration)、GG模型 (Granger-Gray)、平流—干旱模型AA (Advection-Aridity)3个逐日路面实际蒸散发模型在不同时间尺度上的计算精度,并对计算误差的影响因素进行了讨论。结果表明:该地区实测年蒸散发量为746.1 mm,采用各模型的推荐经验参数对该地区蒸散发的估算结果误差较大,普遍干旱条件下蒸散发的计算值比观测值偏小,而湿润条件下的计算值偏大。通过对各模型的经验参数进行调整,各模型对年蒸散发量的计算精度大为提高,但逐日蒸散发过程的计算精度改进效果有限,在7日的时间尺度上,计算结果显著优于逐日的计算结果,在此时间尺度下,AA模型仍存在一定的系统误差,CRAE模型的估算精度相对较差,GG模型的总体计算效果相对最好。根据与蒸渗仪观测结果的对比分析,根据区域特征进行参数调整后的模型,需要在7日及更长时间尺度上,蒸散发模型的估算结果较为可靠。上述研究对全面认识陆面实际蒸散发特征、理解各蒸散发模型在不同时间尺度上的模拟能力、正确认识气候变化条件下的水循环特征具有重要意义。

关键词: 蒸渗仪陆面实际蒸散发CRAE模型Granger-Gray模型平流—干旱模型    
Abstract:

With the newly-designed high resolution lysimeter  installed in Nanchang County of Jiangxi Province, the observed overland actual evapotranpiration (ETa) from September 1, 2007 to August 31, 2008 is used to validate three daily ETa model, i.e. CRAE (Complementary Relationship Areal Evapotranspiration), GG (Granger-Gray) and AA (Advection-Aridity) models  on different time scales, and the model error is also discussed. The results show that the observed annual average ETa is 746.1 mm, while the error of calculated ETa by models with the original parameters is quite large. Calculated ETa of the three models is smaller than the observed value in dry condition and larger than the observation in moisture condition. The models with calibrated parameters show better predictability than the original ones, yet the improvement in daily calculation is limited. Calculation on a 7-day time scale is remarkably better than daily values: there is a systematic error for AA model, and RMSE of CRAE model is fairly large, yet GG model is relatively the best. According to the comparison with the observations of the  lysimeter, locally calibrated models would show reliable results on 7-day or longer time scale. The above-mentioned research is of great importance in full  understanding of ETa process, of predictability of models on different time scales and of the water cycle character under climate change condition.

Key words:  Lysimeter    Actual Evapotranspiration over Land    CRAE model    Granger-Gray model    Advection-Aridity model.
收稿日期: 2009-12-30 出版日期: 2010-09-10
:  P426.2  
基金资助:

水利部科技支撑计划项目“水循环要素趋势与气候变化的响应”(编号:40601017);国家自然科学基金项目“长江流域实际蒸散发的时空格局及其影响要素之间关系的研究”(编号:40701028);中央高校基本科研业务费专项基金项目(编号:2009B01514)

通讯作者: 刘波     E-mail: bobol3705@163.com
作者简介: 刘波(1980-),女,山东东营人,博士研究生,主要从事气候变化与水循环相关研究. E-mail:bobol3705@163.com
服务  
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章  

引用本文:

刘波,翟建青,高超,姜彤,王艳君. 基于实测资料对日蒸散发估算模型的比较[J]. 地球科学进展, 2010, 25(9): 974-980.

Liu Bo,Zhai Jianqing,Gao Chao,Jiang Tong,Wang Yanjun. A Comparison of Daily Actual Evapotranspiration Evaluation Models Based on Field Observational Data. Advances in Earth Science, 2010, 25(9): 974-980.

链接本文:

http://www.adearth.ac.cn/CN/10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2010.09.0974        http://www.adearth.ac.cn/CN/Y2010/V25/I9/974

[1] Ohmura A, Wild M. Is the hydrological cycle accelerating?[J]. Science, 2002, 298: 1 345-1 346.
[2] Ramanathan V, Crutzen P J, Kiehl J T, et al. Aerosols, climate, and the hydrological cycle[J]. Science, 2001, 294: 2 119-2 124.[3] Wang Shaowu, Gong Daoyi. Studies on climate change in China[J].Climatic and Environmental Research,2002,7(2):137-145.[王绍武, 龚道溢. 中国气候变化的研究[J]. 气候与环境研究, 2002, 7(2): 137-145.]
[4] Lawrence Dingman S. Physical Hydrology[M]. Waveland Press Inc, 2002: 312-320
[5] Xu Ziwei, Liu Shaomin, Xu Tongren, et al. Comparison of the gap filling measured by eddy methods of evapotranspiration covariance system[J].Advances in Earth Science,2009,24(4):372-382.[徐自为,刘绍民,徐同仁,等.涡动相关仪观测蒸散量的插补方法比较[J].地球科学进展,2009,24(4):372-382.]
[6] Wang Weizhen, Xu Ziwei, Liu Shaomin, et al. The characteristics of heat and water vapor fluxes over different surfaces in the Heihe river basin[J].Advances in Earth Science,2009,24(7):714-723.[王维真,徐自为,刘绍民,等.黑河流域不同下垫面水热通量特征分析[J].地球科学进展,2009,24(7):714-723.]
[7] Bouchet R J. Evapotranspiration reele et potentielle, signification climatique[J].Public General Assembly Berkeley, International Association Science Hydrology, Gentbrugge, Belgium,1963, 62:134-142.
[8] Brutsaert Wilfried, Stricker Han. An Advection-aridity approach to estimate actual regional evapotranspiration[J].Water Resource Research,1979, 15: 443-449.
[9] Morton F I. Operational estimates of areal evapotranspiration and their significance to the science and practice of hydrology[J].Journal of Hydrology, 1983, 66:1-76.
[10] Granger R J, Gray D M. Evaporation from natural nonsaturated surfaces[J].Journal of Hydrology, 1989, 111:21-29.
[11] Marc B Parlance, Gabriel G Katul. An advection-aridity evaporation model[J].Water Resource Research, 1992, 28(1): 127-132.
[12] Liu Shaomin, Sun Rui, Sun Zhongping, et al. Comparison of different complementary relationship models or regional evapotranspiration Estimation[J].Acta Geographica Sinica,2004,59(3):331-340.[刘绍民,孙睿,孙中平,等.基于互补相关原理的区域蒸散量估算模型比较[J].地理学报,2004,59(3):331-340.]
[13] Qi Peitong, Gu Song, Tang Yanhong, et al. Comparison of three methods for measurement of evapotranspiration in an alpine meadow[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2008,28(1):202-211.[戚培同,古松,唐艳鸿,等.三种方法测定高寒草甸生态系统蒸散比较[J].生态学报,2008,28(1):202-211.]
[14] Wang Shugong, Kang Ersi, Jin Bowen, et al. A study of estimation of evapotranspiration on grass land in the mountains of Hei river basin[J]. Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 2003,25(5):558-565.[王书功,康尔泗,金博文,等.黑河山区草地蒸散发量估算方法研究[J].冰川冻土,2003,25(5):558-565.]
[15] 江西赣江水位连创历史新低[EB/OL].http://news.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2007-11/15/content_7081164.htm,2009.
[16] Priestley 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.
[17] Granger R J. A complementary relationship approach for evaporation from nonsaturated surfaces[J].Journal of Hydrology,1989, 111:31-38.
[18] Xu C Y, Singh V P. Evaluation of three complementary relationship evapotranspiration models by water balance approach to estimate actual regional evapotranspiration in different climatic regions[J].Journal of Hydrology, 2005,(308):105-121.
[19] Hobbins M T, Ramirez J A, Brown T C. The complementary relationship in estimation of regional evapotranspiration: An enhanced advection aridity model[J].Water Resources Research, 2001,37(5):1 389-1 403.

[1] 张强,张之贤,问晓梅,王胜. 陆面蒸散量观测方法比较分析及其影响因素研究[J]. 地球科学进展, 2011, 26(5): 538-547.