摘要
基于2012年黑河绿洲HiWATER高密度通量观测数据,对比研究模型结构差异(单源Penman-Monteith/PM公式与双源PM公式、双源PM公式与双源三温模型)以及PM公式中阻抗参数化差异对蒸散发估算的影响。结果表明:1)与模型结构相对复杂的双源PM公式相比,单源PM公式计算的蒸散发平均相对误差(MAPE)为34%,略优于双源PM公式的40%;2)对于两种模型结构差异显著的双源模型,模型中不含阻抗参数的三温模型比模型中含阻抗参数的PM公式具有更高的估算精度,前者的MAPE为18%(R2=0.85),后者为40%(R2=0.34);3)两种单源和一种双源阻抗参数化方法导致PM公式计算的蒸散发出现不同程度的差异,MAPE可相差6%;4)使用先验知识/数据事前率定阻抗参数化方法,可显著地提高单源PM公式的计算精度(MAPE可降低22%),但随着模型结构与参数化复杂度增加,事前率定双源PM公式的阻抗参数化方法难以提高计算精度(MAPE仅减小0.8%)。
Based on the HiWATER high-density eddy covariance(EC)tower observations in Heihe Oasis in 2012,the impact of model structure differences(comparison between one-source Penman-Monteith/PM equation and two-source PM equation,or comparison between two-source PM equation and two-source three-temperature model)and parameterization differences on the evapotranspiration estimation were evaluated.The results show that,1)compared with the two-source PM equation with a relatively complex model structure,the mean absolute percent error(MAPE)estimated by the one-source PM equation is 34%,which is more accurate than that by the two-source PM equation(40%);2)for two kinds of two-source model with significant differences in model structure,the three-temperature model without resistance parameters has higher estimation accuracy than the PM-based equation with resistance parameters.The former has a MAPE of 18%(R2=0.85),while the PM-based equation has that of 40%(R2=0.34);3)two one-source and one two-source resistance parameterization methods lead to different evapotranspiration estimation accuracy for the PM-based equation,with a MAPE difference of up to 6%;4)using prior knowledge/dataset to calibrate resistance parameterization can significantly improve the estimation accuracy of one-source PM equation(MAPE can be reduced by 22%),but as model structure and parameterization complexity increase,two-source PM equation hasn’t been improved significantly after resistance parameterization calibration(MAPE is only reduced by 0.8%).
作者
赵文利
熊育久
邱国玉
鄢春华
邹振东
秦龙君
ZHAO Wenli;XIONG Yujiu;QIU Guoyu;YAN Chunhua;ZOU Zhendong;QIN Longjun(School of Environment and Energy,Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School,Peking University,Shenzhen 518055;School of Civil Engineering,Sun Yat-Sen University,Guangzhou 510275)
出处
《北京大学学报（自然科学版）》
EI
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2021年第1期162-172,共11页
Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis
基金
深圳市知识创新计划(JCYJ20180504165440088)
国家自然科学基金(41671416)资助。
