蒸发的双参数广义互补模型是否应简化为单参数?对草地和森林地点的成对评估

IF 5.6 1区 农林科学 Q1 AGRONOMY
Songjun Han , Baozhong Zhang , Weijie Wang , Fuqiang Tian , Lei Wang
{"title":"蒸发的双参数广义互补模型是否应简化为单参数?对草地和森林地点的成对评估","authors":"Songjun Han ,&nbsp;Baozhong Zhang ,&nbsp;Weijie Wang ,&nbsp;Fuqiang Tian ,&nbsp;Lei Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.agrformet.2024.110209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Models based on the complementary relationship for estimating evaporation typically incorporate two parameters, one for adjusting the relationship's shape and the other for formulating potential evaporation (<span><math><msub><mi>E</mi><mrow><mi>p</mi><mi>o</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>). In practical applications, single-parameter versions are often derived by fixing one of these parameters. But there is ongoing debate about which parameter to fix and under what conditions. To address these crucial questions in the application of generalized complementary models, we conducted a comprehensive comparison of the consequences arising from the simplification of three prominent two-parameter generalized complementary models (H2012 by Han et al. (2012), B2015 by Brutsaert (2015), and S2022 by Szilagyi et al. (2022)) to their respective single-parameter versions. This analysis utilized data from 24 grassland and 19 forest flux sites, showcasing varying land-atmosphere coupling dynamics. The results underscore the robustness of the two-parameter scheme in accommodating diverse land-atmosphere coupling. The choice of which parameter to fix depends on the land-atmosphere coupling strength. Under conditions where evaporation is closely coupled with the land surface, as observed over grasslands, fixing the <span><math><msub><mi>E</mi><mrow><mi>p</mi><mi>o</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>-related parameter while leaving the shape parameter for calibration (as in the simplification of H2012) preserves the dependence of the shape parameter on land surface wetness, albeit with an acceptable reduction in performance. In contrast, when evaporation is closely coupled to the outer atmosphere, as observed over forests, fixing the shape parameter but leaving the <span><math><msub><mi>E</mi><mrow><mi>p</mi><mi>o</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>-related parameter for calibration (as in the simplifications of B2015 and S2022) maintains the physical correlations between the <span><math><msub><mi>E</mi><mrow><mi>p</mi><mi>o</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>-related parameters and the major atmospheric factors, also with an acceptable reduction in performance. These findings provide valuable insights for the parameterization of complementary models, aiding in the selection of appropriate parameter-fixing strategies based on the prevailing land-atmosphere coupling conditions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50839,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural and Forest Meteorology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Should two-parameter generalized complementary models for evaporation be simplified to single-parameter? A pairwise evaluation over grassland and forest sites\",\"authors\":\"Songjun Han ,&nbsp;Baozhong Zhang ,&nbsp;Weijie Wang ,&nbsp;Fuqiang Tian ,&nbsp;Lei Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.agrformet.2024.110209\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Models based on the complementary relationship for estimating evaporation typically incorporate two parameters, one for adjusting the relationship's shape and the other for formulating potential evaporation (<span><math><msub><mi>E</mi><mrow><mi>p</mi><mi>o</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>). In practical applications, single-parameter versions are often derived by fixing one of these parameters. But there is ongoing debate about which parameter to fix and under what conditions. To address these crucial questions in the application of generalized complementary models, we conducted a comprehensive comparison of the consequences arising from the simplification of three prominent two-parameter generalized complementary models (H2012 by Han et al. (2012), B2015 by Brutsaert (2015), and S2022 by Szilagyi et al. (2022)) to their respective single-parameter versions. This analysis utilized data from 24 grassland and 19 forest flux sites, showcasing varying land-atmosphere coupling dynamics. The results underscore the robustness of the two-parameter scheme in accommodating diverse land-atmosphere coupling. The choice of which parameter to fix depends on the land-atmosphere coupling strength. Under conditions where evaporation is closely coupled with the land surface, as observed over grasslands, fixing the <span><math><msub><mi>E</mi><mrow><mi>p</mi><mi>o</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>-related parameter while leaving the shape parameter for calibration (as in the simplification of H2012) preserves the dependence of the shape parameter on land surface wetness, albeit with an acceptable reduction in performance. In contrast, when evaporation is closely coupled to the outer atmosphere, as observed over forests, fixing the shape parameter but leaving the <span><math><msub><mi>E</mi><mrow><mi>p</mi><mi>o</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>-related parameter for calibration (as in the simplifications of B2015 and S2022) maintains the physical correlations between the <span><math><msub><mi>E</mi><mrow><mi>p</mi><mi>o</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>-related parameters and the major atmospheric factors, also with an acceptable reduction in performance. These findings provide valuable insights for the parameterization of complementary models, aiding in the selection of appropriate parameter-fixing strategies based on the prevailing land-atmosphere coupling conditions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural and Forest Meteorology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural and Forest Meteorology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168192324003228\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRONOMY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural and Forest Meteorology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168192324003228","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基于互补关系的蒸发估算模型通常包含两个参数,一个用于调整关系的形状,另一个用于计算潜在的蒸发量()。在实际应用中,通常会通过固定其中一个参数得出单参数模型。但是,关于在什么条件下固定哪个参数的问题一直存在争议。为了解决广义互补模型应用中的这些关键问题,我们对三个著名的双参数广义互补模型(Han 等人的 H2012 模型(2012 年)、Brutsaert 的 B2015 模型(2015 年)和 Szilagyi 等人的 S2022 模型(2022 年))简化为各自的单参数版本所产生的后果进行了全面比较。这项分析利用了来自 24 个草地和 19 个森林通量站点的数据,展示了不同的陆地-大气耦合动态。结果凸显了双参数方案在适应不同陆地-大气耦合方面的稳健性。选择固定哪个参数取决于陆地-大气耦合强度。在蒸发与地表密切耦合的条件下(如在草原上观测到的情况),固定相关参数,而将形状参数留待校准(如 H2012 的简化),可保留形状参数对地表湿度的依赖性,尽管性能下降是可以接受的。相反,当蒸发与外部大气密切相关时(如在森林上空观测到的情况),固定形状参数,但将相关参数留作校准(如 B2015 和 S2022 的简化),可保持相关参数与主要大气因子之间的物理相关性,但性能降低也是可以接受的。这些发现为补充模式的参数化提供了宝贵的见解,有助于根据普遍的陆地-大气耦合条件选择适当的参数固定策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Should two-parameter generalized complementary models for evaporation be simplified to single-parameter? A pairwise evaluation over grassland and forest sites

Models based on the complementary relationship for estimating evaporation typically incorporate two parameters, one for adjusting the relationship's shape and the other for formulating potential evaporation (Epo). In practical applications, single-parameter versions are often derived by fixing one of these parameters. But there is ongoing debate about which parameter to fix and under what conditions. To address these crucial questions in the application of generalized complementary models, we conducted a comprehensive comparison of the consequences arising from the simplification of three prominent two-parameter generalized complementary models (H2012 by Han et al. (2012), B2015 by Brutsaert (2015), and S2022 by Szilagyi et al. (2022)) to their respective single-parameter versions. This analysis utilized data from 24 grassland and 19 forest flux sites, showcasing varying land-atmosphere coupling dynamics. The results underscore the robustness of the two-parameter scheme in accommodating diverse land-atmosphere coupling. The choice of which parameter to fix depends on the land-atmosphere coupling strength. Under conditions where evaporation is closely coupled with the land surface, as observed over grasslands, fixing the Epo-related parameter while leaving the shape parameter for calibration (as in the simplification of H2012) preserves the dependence of the shape parameter on land surface wetness, albeit with an acceptable reduction in performance. In contrast, when evaporation is closely coupled to the outer atmosphere, as observed over forests, fixing the shape parameter but leaving the Epo-related parameter for calibration (as in the simplifications of B2015 and S2022) maintains the physical correlations between the Epo-related parameters and the major atmospheric factors, also with an acceptable reduction in performance. These findings provide valuable insights for the parameterization of complementary models, aiding in the selection of appropriate parameter-fixing strategies based on the prevailing land-atmosphere coupling conditions.

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
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
9.70%
发文量
415
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: Agricultural and Forest Meteorology is an international journal for the publication of original articles and reviews on the inter-relationship between meteorology, agriculture, forestry, and natural ecosystems. Emphasis is on basic and applied scientific research relevant to practical problems in the field of plant and soil sciences, ecology and biogeochemistry as affected by weather as well as climate variability and change. Theoretical models should be tested against experimental data. Articles must appeal to an international audience. Special issues devoted to single topics are also published. Typical topics include canopy micrometeorology (e.g. canopy radiation transfer, turbulence near the ground, evapotranspiration, energy balance, fluxes of trace gases), micrometeorological instrumentation (e.g., sensors for trace gases, flux measurement instruments, radiation measurement techniques), aerobiology (e.g. the dispersion of pollen, spores, insects and pesticides), biometeorology (e.g. the effect of weather and climate on plant distribution, crop yield, water-use efficiency, and plant phenology), forest-fire/weather interactions, and feedbacks from vegetation to weather and the climate system.
×
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