不同潜在蒸散模型在中国不同气候区的适用性和改进

IF 4.6 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Zedong Li, Yiran Li, Xinxiao Yu, Guodong Jia, Peng Chen, Pengfei Zheng, Yusong Wang, Bingbing Ding
{"title":"不同潜在蒸散模型在中国不同气候区的适用性和改进","authors":"Zedong Li, Yiran Li, Xinxiao Yu, Guodong Jia, Peng Chen, Pengfei Zheng, Yusong Wang, Bingbing Ding","doi":"10.1186/s13717-024-00488-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Accurate estimation of potential evapotranspiration (PET) is the key for studying land-air interaction hydrological processes. Several models are used to estimate the PET based on standardized meteorological data. Although combination-based models have the highest level performance estimation of PET, they require more meteorological data and may therefore be difficult to apply in areas lacking meteorological observation data. The results showed significant differences in the spatial trends of PET calculated by different models in China, the Doorenbots–Pruitts model revealed the highest PET (1902.6 mm), and the Kuzmin model revealed the lowest PET (349.6 mm), with the largest difference being 5.5 times. The Romanenko and the Rohwer models were the recommended temperature-based and aerodynamic-based models. On the other hand, the Abtew model was more suitable for arid and semi-arid regions, while the Priestley–Taylor model was more suitable for humid regions. Combination-based models revealed ideal calculation accuracies, among which the Penman–Monteith model was the best option for PET calculation. The accuracy range of Romanenko, Rohwer, Abten, Priestley Taylor, and Penman Monteith models improved in MPZ and TCZ is higher than that improved in TMZ and SMZ. This does not mean that the improved models have higher accuracy in MPZ and TCZ than in TMZ and SMZ. On the contrary, the original model performed poorly in MPZ and TCZ, so the improved accuracy was relatively large. The unimproved model was already more suitable in TMZ and SMZ, so the improved accuracy was relatively small. Therefore, regional calibration of the PET models can improve the accuracy and applicability of PET calculation, providing a reference for studying hydrological processes in different climatic zones.","PeriodicalId":11419,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Processes","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Applicability and improvement of different potential evapotranspiration models in different climate zones of China\",\"authors\":\"Zedong Li, Yiran Li, Xinxiao Yu, Guodong Jia, Peng Chen, Pengfei Zheng, Yusong Wang, Bingbing Ding\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13717-024-00488-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Accurate estimation of potential evapotranspiration (PET) is the key for studying land-air interaction hydrological processes. Several models are used to estimate the PET based on standardized meteorological data. Although combination-based models have the highest level performance estimation of PET, they require more meteorological data and may therefore be difficult to apply in areas lacking meteorological observation data. The results showed significant differences in the spatial trends of PET calculated by different models in China, the Doorenbots–Pruitts model revealed the highest PET (1902.6 mm), and the Kuzmin model revealed the lowest PET (349.6 mm), with the largest difference being 5.5 times. The Romanenko and the Rohwer models were the recommended temperature-based and aerodynamic-based models. On the other hand, the Abtew model was more suitable for arid and semi-arid regions, while the Priestley–Taylor model was more suitable for humid regions. Combination-based models revealed ideal calculation accuracies, among which the Penman–Monteith model was the best option for PET calculation. The accuracy range of Romanenko, Rohwer, Abten, Priestley Taylor, and Penman Monteith models improved in MPZ and TCZ is higher than that improved in TMZ and SMZ. This does not mean that the improved models have higher accuracy in MPZ and TCZ than in TMZ and SMZ. On the contrary, the original model performed poorly in MPZ and TCZ, so the improved accuracy was relatively large. The unimproved model was already more suitable in TMZ and SMZ, so the improved accuracy was relatively small. Therefore, regional calibration of the PET models can improve the accuracy and applicability of PET calculation, providing a reference for studying hydrological processes in different climatic zones.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11419,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Processes\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-024-00488-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Processes","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-024-00488-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

准确估算潜在蒸散量(PET)是研究陆气相互作用水文过程的关键。根据标准化气象数据,有多种模型可用于估算 PET。虽然基于组合的模型具有最高水平的潜在蒸散量估算性能,但它们需要更多的气象数据,因此在缺乏气象观测数据的地区可能难以应用。结果表明,不同模式计算出的中国 PET 空间变化趋势存在明显差异,Doorenbots-Pruitts 模式计算出的 PET 最高(1902.6 毫米),Kuzmin 模式计算出的 PET 最低(349.6 毫米),最大差异为 5.5 倍。Romanenko 模型和 Rohwer 模型是推荐的基于温度的模型和基于空气动力学的模型。另一方面,Abtew 模型更适合干旱和半干旱地区,而 Priestley-Taylor 模型更适合潮湿地区。基于组合的模型显示出理想的计算精度,其中 Penman-Monteith 模型是 PET 计算的最佳选择。在 MPZ 和 TCZ 中改进的 Romanenko、Rohwer、Abten、Priestley Taylor 和 Penman Monteith 模型的精度范围高于在 TMZ 和 SMZ 中改进的模型。这并不意味着改进后的模型在 MPZ 和 TCZ 中的精度高于在 TMZ 和 SMZ 中的精度。相反,原模型在 MPZ 和 TCZ 的表现较差,因此提高的精度相对较大。而未经改进的模型在 TMZ 和 SMZ 已经比较合适,因此提高的精度相对较小。因此,对 PET 模型进行区域校核可以提高 PET 计算的精度和适用性,为研究不同气候区的水文过程提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Applicability and improvement of different potential evapotranspiration models in different climate zones of China
Accurate estimation of potential evapotranspiration (PET) is the key for studying land-air interaction hydrological processes. Several models are used to estimate the PET based on standardized meteorological data. Although combination-based models have the highest level performance estimation of PET, they require more meteorological data and may therefore be difficult to apply in areas lacking meteorological observation data. The results showed significant differences in the spatial trends of PET calculated by different models in China, the Doorenbots–Pruitts model revealed the highest PET (1902.6 mm), and the Kuzmin model revealed the lowest PET (349.6 mm), with the largest difference being 5.5 times. The Romanenko and the Rohwer models were the recommended temperature-based and aerodynamic-based models. On the other hand, the Abtew model was more suitable for arid and semi-arid regions, while the Priestley–Taylor model was more suitable for humid regions. Combination-based models revealed ideal calculation accuracies, among which the Penman–Monteith model was the best option for PET calculation. The accuracy range of Romanenko, Rohwer, Abten, Priestley Taylor, and Penman Monteith models improved in MPZ and TCZ is higher than that improved in TMZ and SMZ. This does not mean that the improved models have higher accuracy in MPZ and TCZ than in TMZ and SMZ. On the contrary, the original model performed poorly in MPZ and TCZ, so the improved accuracy was relatively large. The unimproved model was already more suitable in TMZ and SMZ, so the improved accuracy was relatively small. Therefore, regional calibration of the PET models can improve the accuracy and applicability of PET calculation, providing a reference for studying hydrological processes in different climatic zones.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecological Processes
Ecological Processes Environmental Science-Ecological Modeling
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.20%
发文量
64
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Ecological Processes is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal devoted to quality publications in ecological studies with a focus on the underlying processes responsible for the dynamics and functions of ecological systems at multiple spatial and temporal scales. The journal welcomes manuscripts on techniques, approaches, concepts, models, reviews, syntheses, short communications and applied research for advancing our knowledge and capability toward sustainability of ecosystems and the environment. Integrations of ecological and socio-economic processes are strongly encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信