CAJ | 학술논문

参考作物蒸散发（ET0，reference evapotranspiration）是计算植被耗水量、分析区域水分平衡、管理水资源的基本参数。由于区域间气象条件的差异，ET0模型在不同地区表现出不同的适用性。蒸渗仪实测是欧美地区评价参考作物蒸散发模型的经典方法，而中国尚少研究，华北地区未见报道。2012年生长季（4-10月），应用自动称重式蒸渗仪实测高羊茅草坪蒸散评价了Penman-Monteith (FAO-56)、Hargreaves-Samani、Priestley-Taylor、Penman-van Bavel模型在北京地区的适用性。在2个蒸渗仪中建植冷季型高羊茅草坪，以获得ET0标准数据。试验地安装Dynamet气象站，自动测量并记录气象数据：空气温度、空气相对湿度、太阳总辐射和高度2m的风速，用于模型计算参考作物蒸散发。应用线性回归与均方根误差（RMSE）、一致性指数（d）2个指标评价模型的预测准确性。研究结果表明，太阳总辐射与月蒸散之间呈现较强的线性关系（R2=0.95，p=2.72×10-7），说明太阳辐射能量是驱动SPAC（soil-plant-atmosphere continuum）系统中水分从植被向大气运动的主要动力。随着时间尺度减小，模型的估算准确度降低。由于模型的输入参数不同，在 ET0计算中出现了不同方向的偏差。月尺度上， Priestley-Taylor模型低估，而Penman-Monteith、Hargreaves-Samani和Penman-van Bavel模型高估了蒸散。日尺度上，Hargreaves-Samani模型和Penman-van Bavel模型略微高估了日蒸散，比率分别为1.0167和1.0526；Penman-Monteith 模型和 Priestly-Taylor 模型低估了日蒸散，比率分别为0.8204和0.7593。时尺度上，除了Priestly-Taylor模型全部得出最低的数值，其余模型在不同天气类型下得出不同的计算结果。综合月、日、时3个时间尺度的评价结果，Penman-van Bavel是最准确的ET0计算公式，RMSE分别为0.63 mm/d（月）、1.43 mm/d（日）、0.087mm/h（时），d值分别为0.96（月）、0.89（日）、0.87（时）。Penman-Monteith模型的计算准确性比Penman-van Bavel模型略低，d值为0.73～0.93。參攷作物蒸散髮（ET0，reference evapotranspiration）是計算植被耗水量、分析區域水分平衡、管理水資源的基本參數。由于區域間氣象條件的差異，ET0模型在不同地區錶現齣不同的適用性。蒸滲儀實測是歐美地區評價參攷作物蒸散髮模型的經典方法，而中國尚少研究，華北地區未見報道。2012年生長季（4-10月），應用自動稱重式蒸滲儀實測高羊茅草坪蒸散評價瞭Penman-Monteith (FAO-56)、Hargreaves-Samani、Priestley-Taylor、Penman-van Bavel模型在北京地區的適用性。在2箇蒸滲儀中建植冷季型高羊茅草坪，以穫得ET0標準數據。試驗地安裝Dynamet氣象站，自動測量併記錄氣象數據：空氣溫度、空氣相對濕度、太暘總輻射和高度2m的風速，用于模型計算參攷作物蒸散髮。應用線性迴歸與均方根誤差（RMSE）、一緻性指數（d）2箇指標評價模型的預測準確性。研究結果錶明，太暘總輻射與月蒸散之間呈現較彊的線性關繫（R2=0.95，p=2.72×10-7），說明太暘輻射能量是驅動SPAC（soil-plant-atmosphere continuum）繫統中水分從植被嚮大氣運動的主要動力。隨著時間呎度減小，模型的估算準確度降低。由于模型的輸入參數不同，在 ET0計算中齣現瞭不同方嚮的偏差。月呎度上， Priestley-Taylor模型低估，而Penman-Monteith、Hargreaves-Samani和Penman-van Bavel模型高估瞭蒸散。日呎度上，Hargreaves-Samani模型和Penman-van Bavel模型略微高估瞭日蒸散，比率分彆為1.0167和1.0526；Penman-Monteith 模型和 Priestly-Taylor 模型低估瞭日蒸散，比率分彆為0.8204和0.7593。時呎度上，除瞭Priestly-Taylor模型全部得齣最低的數值，其餘模型在不同天氣類型下得齣不同的計算結果。綜閤月、日、時3箇時間呎度的評價結果，Penman-van Bavel是最準確的ET0計算公式，RMSE分彆為0.63 mm/d（月）、1.43 mm/d（日）、0.087mm/h（時），d值分彆為0.96（月）、0.89（日）、0.87（時）。Penman-Monteith模型的計算準確性比Penman-van Bavel模型略低，d值為0.73～0.93。
삼고작물증산발（ET0，reference evapotranspiration）시계산식피모수량、분석구역수분평형、관리수자원적기본삼수。유우구역간기상조건적차이，ET0모형재불동지구표현출불동적괄용성。증삼의실측시구미지구평개삼고작물증산발모형적경전방법，이중국상소연구，화북지구미견보도。2012년생장계（4-10월），응용자동칭중식증삼의실측고양모초평증산평개료Penman-Monteith (FAO-56)、Hargreaves-Samani、Priestley-Taylor、Penman-van Bavel모형재북경지구적괄용성。재2개증삼의중건식랭계형고양모초평，이획득ET0표준수거。시험지안장Dynamet기상참，자동측량병기록기상수거：공기온도、공기상대습도、태양총복사화고도2m적풍속，용우모형계산삼고작물증산발。응용선성회귀여균방근오차（RMSE）、일치성지수（d）2개지표평개모형적예측준학성。연구결과표명，태양총복사여월증산지간정현교강적선성관계（R2=0.95，p=2.72×10-7），설명태양복사능량시구동SPAC（soil-plant-atmosphere continuum）계통중수분종식피향대기운동적주요동력。수착시간척도감소，모형적고산준학도강저。유우모형적수입삼수불동，재 ET0계산중출현료불동방향적편차。월척도상， Priestley-Taylor모형저고，이Penman-Monteith、Hargreaves-Samani화Penman-van Bavel모형고고료증산。일척도상，Hargreaves-Samani모형화Penman-van Bavel모형략미고고료일증산，비솔분별위1.0167화1.0526；Penman-Monteith 모형화 Priestly-Taylor 모형저고료일증산，비솔분별위0.8204화0.7593。시척도상，제료Priestly-Taylor모형전부득출최저적수치，기여모형재불동천기류형하득출불동적계산결과。종합월、일、시3개시간척도적평개결과，Penman-van Bavel시최준학적ET0계산공식，RMSE분별위0.63 mm/d（월）、1.43 mm/d（일）、0.087mm/h（시），d치분별위0.96（월）、0.89（일）、0.87（시）。Penman-Monteith모형적계산준학성비Penman-van Bavel모형략저，d치위0.73～0.93。
Reference evapotranspiration (ET0) is the basic parameter for the vegetation evapotranspiration calculation, the regional water balance analysis, and the water resources management. The ET0models have different adaptability for different regions because of the difference in meteorological conditions among regions. Measurement using lysimeter is the classical method for ET0model evaluation in European and American areas, but is seldom used in China, and no research reported for North China. Assessment of four ET0 models, Penman-Monteith (FAO-56), Hargreaves-Samani, Priestley-Taylor, and Penman-van Bavel were conducted in Beijing using tall fescue (Festuca arundinaceaL.) turf evapotranspiration measurement by auto-weighing lysimeter during the growing season (April - October) of 2012. Two lysimeters were established in cold-season grass tall fescue for standard ET0. The weather station (Dynamet, Dynamax Co. Ltd.) was set up in the experiment site to measure and record automatically the meteorological data of air temperature, air relative humidity, solar radiation and wind speed at 2 meter height above ground for the ET0 calculation by the models. The linear regression and the root-mean-square error (RMSE) and the index of agreement (d) were used for assessing the prediction accuracy of the different models. The results indicated that the solar radiation showed a linear relationship (R2=0.95,p=2.72×10-7) with the monthly reference evapotranspiration, indicating that the solar radiation energy was the main force to drive water from the vegetation to the atmosphere in SPAC system. The accuracy of the models declined with the time scale. The models showed different deviations in ET0 calculation because of the different parameters input. The monthly ET0was underestimated by Priestley-Taylor model but overestimated by Penman-Monteith、Hargreaves-Samani and Penman-van Bavel models. For the dailyET0, Hargreaves-Samani and Penman-van Bavel models had a slight overestimation with the rate of 1.0167 and 1.0526, respectively, but Penman-Monteith and Priestley-Taylor models had an underestimation with the rate of 0.8204 and 0.7593, respectively. For the timely ET0, Priestley-Taylor had the lowest value among the models, while other models resulted in different values under different weather conditions. The overall estimation for the ET0 at the monthly, daily, and hourly scales showed that the Penman-van Bavel equation was the most precise method for calculating reference evapotranspiration, with a RMSE of 0.63 mm/d and a d-index of 0.96 (monthly), a RMSE of 1.43 mm/d and a d-index of 0.89 (daily), a RMSE of 0.087 mm/h and a d-index of 0.87 (hourly). The calculating accuracy of Penman-Monteith model was a little lower than that of Penman-van Bavel with a d-index of 0.73-0.93.