平衡法土壤墒情诊断模型

生态学杂志

平衡法土壤墒情诊断模型

李兆¹,黄治平¹,刘书田^1,2,侯彦林^1，2*,郑宏艳¹,丁健¹,米长虹¹,王铄今^2

(¹农业部环境保护科研监测所，天津 300191； ²北部湾环境演变与资源利用教育部重点实验室（广西师范学院），广西地表过程与智能模拟重点实验室（广西师范学院），南宁 530001）

出版日期:2017-12-10 发布日期:2017-12-10

Balance diagnostic model of soil moisture.

LI Zhao¹, HUANG Zhi-ping¹, LIU Shu-tian^1,2, HOU Yan-lin^1,2*, ZHENG Hong-yan¹, DING Jian¹, MI Chang-hong¹, WANG Shuo-jin²

(¹Agro-Environmental Protection Institute, Ministry of Agriculture, Tianjin 300191, China; Key Laboratory of Environment Change and Resources Use in Beibu Gulf (Guangxi Teachers Education University); Guangxi Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Intelligent Simulation (Guangxi Teachers Education University), Nanning 530001, China).

Online:2017-12-10 Published:2017-12-10

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本文首先介绍传统水量平衡法利弊，重点介绍了所建立的基于土壤初始含水量、时段降水量和时段“蒸渗流项”的平衡法土壤墒情诊断模型的原理和建模方法，并应用7个省23个县87个监测点2012—2014年的数据建模，应用2015年的数据进行了验证。结果表明：平衡法模型诊断和预测合格率只有50%左右；模型合格率不高的主要原因是基于降水量和土壤含水量之和的分段预测时数据量少，导致参数确定依据不足。所建立的平衡法模型作为墒情诊断模型使用还需进一步研究。

关键词: 间作, 土壤化学性质, 土壤综合肥力, 土壤生物学性质, 豆科作物, 山药

Abstract: The advantages and disadvantages of traditional water balance method were discussed. The principle and modeling method of balance diagnostic model of soil moisture based on initial soil water content, time-period precipitation and time-period “evapotranspiration, leakage and runoff” were emphatically introduced. The model was established by the data of 87 monitoring sites in 23 counties in 7 provinces during 2012-2014, and validated by the data of 2015. The results showed that the balance diagnostic model had only about 50% qualification rate in diagnosis and prediction. The main reason for the low qualification rate was the small amount of data based on the subsection prediction of the sum of precipitation and soil water content, which led to an inadequate prerequirement for parameter determination. The balance diagnostic model established as a soil moisture diagnostic model needs to be further studied.

Key words: yam, leguminous crop, soil biological property, soil comprehensive fertility., soil chemical property, intercropping

李兆,黄治平,刘书田,侯彦林,郑宏艳,丁健,米长虹,王铄今. 平衡法土壤墒情诊断模型[J]. 生态学杂志.

LI Zhao, HUANG Zhi-ping, LIU Shu-tian, HOU Yan-lin, ZHENG Hong-yan, DING Jian, MI Chang-hong, WANG Shuo-jin. Balance diagnostic model of soil moisture.[J]. cje.

[1]	苏旭, 栾策, 吴奇, 姜展博, 祝晓妍, 王丽学. 生物炭对玉米/大豆、玉米/花生间作系统土壤水肥热及产量的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2021, 40(1): 115-122.
[2]	伏云珍, 马琨, 崔慧珍, 李光文. 间作作物种间相互作用对马铃薯根际土壤丛枝菌根真菌的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2021, 40(1): 131-139.
[3]	何如, 张双羽, 杨彩红, 王立. 绿洲灌区不同耕作模式对土壤性质的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2020, 39(11): 3890-3902.
[4]	孙于卜,毕华兴,段航旗,彭瑞东,王晶晶. 苹果-大豆间作系统细根分布变异及地下竞争 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2019, 38(2): 459-466.
[5]	郑亚强,杜广祖,李亦菲,陈斌,李正跃,肖关丽. 间作甘蔗对玉米根际微生物功能多样性的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2018, 37(7): 2013-2019.
[6]	朱启林,向蕊,汤利,龙光强. 间作条件下施氮量对马铃薯光合特性的调控作用 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2018, 37(5): 1391-1397.
[7]	杨玉珍,张志浩,李娟. 不同间作模式下油用牡丹‘凤丹’光合特性及其与环境因子的关系 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2018, 37(10): 2905-2912.
[8]	白伟,孙占祥*,郑家明,杜桂娟,蔡倩,冯良山,杨宁. 东北风沙半干旱区仁用杏作物间作对作物产量和土地生产力的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2017, 36(9): 2521-2528.
[9]	宁川川1,2,陈权洋1,胡洪婕1,骆世明1,2,蔡昆争1,2*. 水稻与雍菜间作对水稻生长、产量和病虫害控制的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2017, 36(10): 2866-2873.
[10]	柴强*,殷文. 间作系统的水分竞争互补机理 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2017, 36(1): 233-239.
[11]	王克林1,2,黄月1,孙学凯1,曾德慧1*. 辽北地区杨树-玉米间作对土壤水分和养分含量的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2016, 35(9): 2386-2392.
[12]	张作为1,史海滨1*,李仙岳1,李祯1,闫建文1,李介钧2. 限量灌溉对河套灌区间作小麦干物质转移与灌浆特征的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2016, 35(2): 415-422.
[13]	李志贤1*,陈章1,陈国梁1,向言词2,朱佳文3,代益帆3,邓彪3. 镉富集植物油菜与玉米间作对玉米吸收积累镉的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2016, 35(1): 26-31.
[14]	居述云1,2,汪洁2,3,宓彦彦2,4,李柱2,陈亚华1**,吴龙华2,骆永明2,5. 重金属污染土壤的伴矿景天/小麦-茄子间作和轮作修复 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(8): 2181-2186.
[15]	沈雪峰,方越,董朝霞,陈勇**. 甘蔗花生间作对甘蔗地土壤杂草种子萌发特性的影响 [J]. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(3): 656-660.