基于Hargreaves-Samani回归修正的作物参考蒸散发计算适用性研究

doi:10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2022.133

干旱区地理 ›› 2022, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (6): 1752-1760.doi: 10.12118/j.issn.1000-6060.2022.133

基于Hargreaves-Samani回归修正的作物参考蒸散发计算适用性研究

傅迎豪¹(),申晓晶¹(),李王成^1,^2,³,吴旭¹,张青青¹

1.宁夏大学土木与水利工程学院，宁夏银川 750021
2.旱区现代农业水资源高效利用教育部工程研究中心，宁夏银川 750021
3.省部共建西北土地退化与生态恢复国家重点实验室，宁夏银川 750021

收稿日期:2022-04-01 修回日期:2022-05-13 出版日期:2022-11-25 发布日期:2023-02-01
通讯作者: 申晓晶（1989-），女，博士，讲师，主要从事气候变化与水资源安全调控研究. E-mail: sxj15191418250@126.com
作者简介:傅迎豪（1998-），男，硕士，主要从事气候变化与水资源安全调控研究. E-mail: yhfu1998@163.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(52169010);国家重点研发项目(2021YFD1900600);国家自然科学基金(51869023);宁夏自然科学基金项目(2021AAC03043);宁夏重点研发项目（引才专项）(2019BEB04029)

Applicability of reference crop evapotranspiration calculation based on Hargreaves-Samani regression correction

FU Yinghao¹(),SHEN Xiaojing¹(),LI Wangcheng^1,^2,³,WU Xu¹,ZHANG Qingqing¹

1. School of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering, Ningxia University, Yinchuan 750021, Ningxia, China
2. Engineering Research Center for Efficient Utilization of Water Resources in Modern Agriculture in Arid Areas, the Ministry of Education, Yinchuan 750021, Ningxia, China
3. The State Key Laboratory of Land Degradation and Ecological Restoration in Northwest China, Jointly Established by the Province and the Ministry of Education, Yinchuan 750021, Ningxia, China

Received:2022-04-01 Revised:2022-05-13 Online:2022-11-25 Published:2023-02-01
Contact: Xiaojing SHEN

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为提高Hargreaves-Samani（H-S）模型计算参考蒸散发的精度，利用西北黄河流域与长江中下游平原共128个气象站点1961—2010年的逐日气象资料对H-S模型进行回归修正，以Penman-Monteith（P-M）模型为标准，评价了H-S改进模型H-S_CORR模型的计算精度，并且以第六次国际耦合模式比较计划（CMIP6）气候模式来对H-S_CORR模型进行了未来适应性评价。结果表明：修正后，在验证期内，长江中下游平原4个分区的平均绝对误差（MAE）和均方根误差（RMSE）的平均值分别下降了6.21 mm·月^-1和6.38 mm·月^-1；西北黄河流域4个分区的MAE和RMSE的平均值分别下降了9.26 mm·月^-1和9.23 mm·月^-1，2个研究区域修正后的决定系数（R²）比修正前最少提高1%。在CMIP6气候模式的未来气候情景下R²均达到0.98以上，具有良好的适应性。该研究修正的模型方法可为仅有气温数据的地区提供较高精度的参考蒸散发估算方法，为高频灌溉提供较为准确的数据基础。

关键词: 参考作物蒸散量, Hargreaves-Samani模型, Penman-Monteith模型, 模型校验, 适用性

Abstract:

The Hargreaves-Samani (H-S) model for calculating reference crop evapotranspiration (ET₀) was regressed and corrected using daily meteorological data from 128 meteorological stations in the Northwest Yellow River Basin and the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River from 1961, 1981, to 2010. The calculation accuracy of the H-S upgraded model H-S_CORR model was evaluated using site data from 2011 to 2020 and the Penman-Monteith model was used as the reference. The ACCESS-CM2 model and the future test scenario SSP2-4.5 are also used to assess the H-S_CORR model’s future adaptability as part of the Sixth International Coupling Model Comparison Program (CMIP6) climate simulation experiment. The results show that the mean absolute error (MAE) of the four subdomains in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River decreases from 2.58-24.28 mm to 1.53-7.99 mm per month after correction, and the root mean square error (RMSE) per month decreases from 3.22-24.56 mm to 1.96-9.27 mm during the validation period. Monthly, both MAE and RMSE decrease by 6.21 mm and 6.38 mm, respectively. The MAE of the four subregions of the Northwest Yellow River Basin decreases from 2.51-34.1 mm per month to 1.11-8.94 mm per month, and the RMSE decreases from 3.02-34.58 mm to 1.43-10.46 mm per month. MAE and RMSE monthly averages decrease by 9.26 mm and 9.23 mm, respectively. Most months in the two study areas have a coefficient of determination (R²) greater than 0.9, whereas a few months have an R² greater than 0.8, and the corrected R² value is at least 1% higher than before the correction. The R² values in the CMIP6 climate model’s future climate scenarios are greater than 0.98, showing strong adaptability. Therefore, the H-S_CORR model’s performance in the Northwest Yellow River Basin, as well as the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, is improved; it can now better simulate the seasonal cycle and long-term trend of ET₀, as well as improve the accuracy of reference crop evapotranspiration calculations.

Key words: reference crop evapotranspiration, Hargreaves-Samani model, Penman-Monteith model, model validation, applicability

傅迎豪, 申晓晶, 李王成, 吴旭, 张青青. 基于Hargreaves-Samani回归修正的作物参考蒸散发计算适用性研究[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(6): 1752-1760.

FU Yinghao, SHEN Xiaojing, LI Wangcheng, WU Xu, ZHANG Qingqing. Applicability of reference crop evapotranspiration calculation based on Hargreaves-Samani regression correction[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2022, 45(6): 1752-1760.

图/表 8

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

表1

图6

图7

参考文献 21

[1]	蔡辉艺, 余钟波, 杨传国, 等. 淮河流域参考蒸散发量变化分析[J]. 河海大学学报, 2012, 40(1): 76-82.
	[Cai Huiyi, Yu Zhongbo, Yang Chuanguo, et al. Analysis of reference evapotranspiration change in the Huaihe River Basin[J]. Journal of Hohai University, 2012, 40(1): 76-82.]
[2]	宁亚洲, 张福平, 冯起, 等. 基于SEBAL模型的疏勒河流域蒸散发估算与灌溉效率评价[J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(4): 928-938.
	[Ning Yazhou, Zhang Fuping, Feng Qi, et al. Estimation of evapotranspiration in Shule River Basin based on SEBAL model and evaluation on irrigation efficiency[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2020, 43(4): 928-938.]
[3]	Shiri J, Kişi Ö, Landeras G, et al. Daily reference evapotranspiration modeling by using genetic programming approach in the Basque Country (northern Spain)[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2012, 414: 302-316.
[4]	史继清, 边多, 杨霏云, 等. 西藏地区潜在蒸散量变化特征及灰色模型预测初探[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(6): 1570-1579.
	[Shi Jiqing, Bian Duo, Yang Feiyun, et al. Variation characteristics of potential evapotranspiration and the forecast of grey model in Tibet[J]. Arid Land Geography, 2021, 44(6): 1570-1579.]
[5]	Allen R G, Pereira L S, Raes D, et al. Crop evapotranspiration: Guidelines for computing crop water requirements[M]. Rome: FAO Irrigation and Drainage Publications, 1998.
[6]	Makkink G F. Testing the Penman formula by means of lysimeters[J]. Journal of the Institution of Water Engineers, 1957, 11(3): 277-288.
[7]	Hargreaves G H, Samani Z A. Reference crop evapotranspiration from temperature[J]. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 1985, 1(2): 96-99. doi: 10.13031/2013.26773
[8]	赵玲玲, 夏军, 许崇育, 等. 水文循环模拟中蒸散发估算方法综述[J]. 地理学报, 2013, 68(1): 127-136.
	[Zhao Lingling, Xia Jun, Xu Chongyu, et al. Evapotranspiration estimation methods in hydrological models[J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2013, 68(1): 127-136.]
[9]	Chen D, Gao G, Xu C Y, et al. Comparison of the Thornthwaite method and pan data with the standard Penman-Monteith estimates of reference evapotranspiration in China[J]. Climate Research, 2005, 28(2): 123-132. doi: 10.3354/cr028123
[10]	邹磊, 夏军, 马细霞, 等. 潜在蒸散发量估算方法在河南省的适用性分析[J]. 水文, 2014, 34(3): 17-23.
	[Zou Lei, Xia Jun, Ma Xixia, et al. Applicability of potential evapotranspiration methods in Henan Province[J]. Journal of China Hydrology, 2014, 34(3): 17-23.]
[11]	Hargreaves G H, Allen R G. History and evaluation of Hargreaves evapotranspiration equation[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 2003, 129(1): 53-63. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2003)129:1(53)
[12]	Xu C Y, Singh V P. Evaluation and generalization of temperature-based methods for calculating evaporation[J]. Hydrological Processes, 2001, 15(2): 305-319. doi: 10.1002/hyp.119
[13]	刘钰, Pereira L S. 气象数据缺测条件下参考作物腾发量的计算方法[J]. 水利学报, 2001, 42(3): 11-17.
	[Liu Yu, Pereira L S. Calculation methods for reference evapotranspiration with limited weather data[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2001, 42(3): 11-17.]
[14]	Tabari H, Talaee P H. Local calibration of the Hargreaves and Priestley-Taylor equations for estimating reference evapotranspiration in arid and cold climates of Iran based on the Penman-Monteith model[J]. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 2011, 16(10): 837-845. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000366
[15]	汤鹏程, 徐冰, 高占义, 等. 西藏高海拔地区气象数据缺失条件下的ET₀计算研究[J]. 水利学报, 2017, 48(9): 1055-1063.
	[Tang Pengcheng, Xu Bing, Gao Zhanyi, et al. Simplified limited data ET₀ equation adapted for high-elevation locations in Tibet[J]. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 2017, 48(9): 1055-1063.]
[16]	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.
	[Sun Qingyu, Tong Ling, Zhang Baozhong, et al. Comparison of methods for calculating reference crop evapotranspiration in Haihe River Basin of China[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2010, 26(11): 68-72.]
[17]	Gavilan P, Lorite I J, Tornero S, et al. Regional calibration of Hargreaves equation for estimating reference ET in a semiarid environment[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2016, 81(3): 257-281. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2005.05.001
[18]	冯克鹏, 田军仓. Hargreaves公式计算宁夏地区参考作物腾发量的研究[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2014, 28(9): 100-105.
	[Feng Kepeng, Tian Juncang. Estimation of evapotranspiration in Ningxia by Hargreaves equation[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2014, 28(9): 100-105.]
[19]	夏兴生, 潘耀忠, 朱秀芳, 等. 农业分区框架下Hargreaves-Samani公式的逐月回归修正[J]. 农业机械学报, 2020, 51(3): 258-267.
	[Xia Xingsheng, Pan Yaozhong, Zhu Xiufang, et al. Regression correction of Hargreaves-Samani equation by monthly under framework of China’s agricultural comprehensive zoning[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 2020, 51(3): 258-267.]
[20]	刘晨峰, 张志强, 孙阁, 等. 基于涡度相关法和树干液流法评价杨树人工林生态系统蒸发散及其环境响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2009, 33(4): 706-718. doi: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2009.04.009
	[Liu Chenfeng, Zhang Zhiqiang, Sun Ge, et al. Quantifying evapotranspiration and biophysical regulations of a poplar plantation assessed by eddy covariance and sap-flow methods[J]. Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2009, 33(4): 706-718.] doi: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2009.04.009
[21]	贾悦, 崔宁博, 魏新平, 等. 考虑辐射改进Hargreaves模型计算川中丘陵区参考作物蒸散量[J]. 农业工程学报, 2016, 32(21): 152-160.
	[Jia Yue, Cui Ningbo, Wei Xinping, et al. Modifying Hargreaves model considering radiation to calculate reference crop evapotranspiration in hilly area of central Sichuan Basin[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2016, 32(21): 152-160.]

分区	统计指标	修正前后	最小值	最大值	平均值	分区	统计指标	修正前后	最小值	最大值	平均值
A区	MAE	原始	4.08	24.22	12.47	E区	MAE	原始	2.94	34	17.24
	MAE	修正后	1.76	7.99	3.42		MAE	修正后	1.45	8.48	4.94
	RMSE	原始	4.31	24.56	13.24		RMSE	原始	3.37	34.58	17.73
	RMSE	修正后	2.23	9.27	4.19		RMSE	修正后	1.5	9.59	5.5
	R²	原始	0.71	0.93	0.82		R²	原始	0.51	0.9	0.78
	R²	修正后	0.9	0.97	0.93		R²	修正后	0.8	0.96	0.88
B区	MAE	原始	3.18	23.25	11.57	F区	MAE	原始	3.43	18.43	10.45
	MAE	修正后	1.53	8.07	3.1		MAE	修正后	2.62	8.94	4.55
	RMSE	原始	3.78	23.45	12.51		RMSE	原始	4.01	19.74	11.5
	RMSE	修正后	1.96	8.91	3.87		RMSE	修正后	3.4	10.46	5.47
	R²	原始	0.71	0.94	0.86		R²	原始	0.6	0.87	0.79
	R²	修正后	0.83	0.96	0.92		R²	修正后	0.81	0.93	0.88
C区	MAE	原始	2.5	20.6	8.15	G区	MAE	原始	2.51	15.6	7.91
	MAE	修正后	1.69	8.48	4.26		MAE	修正后	1.11	3.53	1.94
	RMSE	原始	3.22	21.16	9.15		RMSE	原始	3.02	15.87	8.51
	RMSE	修正后	2.08	0.92	5.11		RMSE	修正后	1.43	3.93	2.37
	R²	原始	0.66	0.92	0.85		R²	原始	0.61	0.92	0.82
	R²	修正后	0.82	0.94	0.92		R²	修正后	0.86	0.98	0.9
D区	MAE	原始	2.74	17.78	7.58	H区	MAE	原始	9.59	26.94	15.54
	MAE	修正后	2.14	8.78	4.16		MAE	修正后	1.38	4	2.66
	RMSE	原始	3.56	22.35	8.9		RMSE	原始	10.48	27.17	15.9
	RMSE	修正后	3	9.34	5.09		RMSE	修正后	1.84	0.79	3.37
	R²	原始	0.65	0.97	0.83		R²	原始	0.61	0.79	0.68
	R²	修正后	0.81	0.98	0.92		R²	修正后	0.81	0.96	0.87

基于Hargreaves-Samani回归修正的作物参考蒸散发计算适用性研究

Applicability of reference crop evapotranspiration calculation based on Hargreaves-Samani regression correction

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 21

相关文章 10

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	罗新兰,孙悦,刘利民,王立为,杨丽桃,高西宁. 华北一作区马铃薯生长发育及产量对干旱胁迫响应的模拟研究——以武川县为例[J]. 干旱区地理, 2022, 45(3): 867-878.
[2]	史继清,边多,杨霏云,甘臣龙,樊栋樑. 西藏地区潜在蒸散量变化特征及灰色模型预测初探[J]. 干旱区地理, 2021, 44(6): 1570-1579.
[3]	冯冬蕾, 程志刚, 赵雷, 吴琼, 郑诗宇, 顾正强. 4种干旱判别指数在东北地区适用性分析 [J]. 干旱区地理, 2020, 43(2): 371-379.
[4]	刘海军, 陈亚宁, 徐长春. RFE2.0遥感降水数据在新疆的适用性评价[J]. 干旱区地理, 2018, 41(4): 809-816.
[5]	冯星, 郭建青, 孙东永, 曹洋. 近55 a渭河流域气候变化[J]. 干旱区地理, 2018, 41(4): 718-725.
[6]	韩盟伟, 赵广举, 穆兴民, 安正锋, 高鹏, 孙文义. 黄土高原1959-2015年潜在蒸发量的时空变化[J]. 干旱区地理, 2017, 40(5): 997-1004.
[7]	高飞, 李新虎. 塔里木盆地绿洲参考作物蒸散量计算方法比较[J]. 干旱区地理, 2016, 39(1): 130-135.
[8]	杜加强，熊珊珊，刘成程，郭杨，舒俭民，张林波. 黄河上游地区几种参考作物蒸散量计算方法的适用性比较[J]. 干旱区地理, 2013, 36(5): 831-840.
[9]	胡增运，倪勇勇，邵华，殷刚，艳燕，贾超君. CFSR、ERA-Interim和MERRA降水资料在中亚地区的适用性[J]. 干旱区地理, 2013, 36(4): 700-708.
[10]	张晓琳，熊立华，林琳，龙海峰. 五种潜在蒸散发公式在汉江流域的应用[J]. 干旱区地理, 2012, 35(02): 229-237.