密度修正对冬小麦/夏玉米轮作田潜热、CO2通量及其能量闭合度的影响

Influence of density correction on latent heat, CO2 flux and energy balance closure in winter wheat/summer maize rotation fields

  • 摘要: 本文利用涡度相关技术对青岛农业大学现代农业科技示范园试验站2013—2014年冬小麦/夏玉米轮作田与大气之间CO2、水汽和能量交换进行测量, 分别对潜热和CO2通量进行两种密度修正(WPL修正和Liu修正)并进行对比, 计算了两种密度修正前后冬小麦/夏玉米轮作田的能量闭合度。结果表明: WPL修正与Liu修正可以提高潜热通量, WPL修正后夏玉米田潜热通量约提高6%, 冬小麦田约提高2%; Liu修正后夏玉米田提高不足1%, 冬小麦田提高约2%。因此WPL修正对于夏玉米田潜热的修正效果明显优于Liu修正, 而对冬小麦田潜热修正两种方法效果相同。两种修正方法对于CO2通量具有降低的修正效果, WPL修正后夏玉米田和冬小麦田CO2通量分别降低3%和4%; Liu修正后夏玉米田和冬小麦田CO2分别降低2%和3%。可以看出, WPL修正和Liu修正对CO2通量修正前后差别非常小(差距均为1%)。通过对青岛地区冬小麦/夏玉米轮作田能量闭合度的分析, 发现密度修正可以提高能量闭合度, 但不同下垫面有不同的修正效果。裸地情况下, WPL修正可以提高能量闭合度约2.53%~9.76%, 夏玉米田为4.05%, 冬小麦田为1.35%; 而Liu修正对裸地能量闭合度的提高小于2.53%, 对夏玉米田和冬小麦田提高约为1.35%。显然WPL修正对于能量闭合度的修正幅度大于Liu修正。能量闭合度大小关系为裸地Ⅰ(夏玉米出苗前)>裸地Ⅱ(冬小麦出苗前)>夏玉米田>冬小麦田。

     

    Abstract: In the past two decades, the eddy covariance technique has been used as a normalized measure method of exchange of CO2, water vapor and heat between vegetation and the atmosphere. To understand the variation characteristics of CO2, water vapor and heat fluxes of winter wheat/summer maize rotation system, an experiment was conducted in the period from June 2013 to June 2014 at Qingdao Modern Agricultural Demonstration Farm of Qingdao Agricultural University. The CO2, water vapor and heat fluxes were measured during both winter wheat and summer maize growing seasons using the eddy covariance method and the values corrected by two density correction methods (WPL correction and Liu correction), and then the difference between the two methods compared. An energy balance closure was also computed during bare and vegetation cover periods of both winter wheat and summer maize based on the two density correction methods. It was found that both of the two methods (WPL correction and Liu correction) increased the amount of latent heat flux. WPL correction method increased latent heat flux by about 6% for summer maize season and 2% for winter wheat season, while Liu correction method increased latent heat flux by less than 1% for summer maize season and about 2% for winter wheat season. WPL correction method reduced the amount of CO2 flux by less than 3% for summer maize and 4% for winter wheat. Also the Liu correction method reduced the amount of CO2 by about 2% for summer maize and 3% for winter wheat. There was little difference (about 1%) between the two correction methods for the correction of both latent heat and CO2 fluxes. The two correction methods had the potential to increase energy balance closure. WPL correction obviously increased energy balance closure by about 2.53%9.76% for bare soil, by 4.05% for summer maize and by 1.35% for winter wheat. Then Liu correction increased energy balance closure by less than 2.53% for bare soil and 1.35% for both summer maize and winter wheat seasons. This suggested that the degree of correction by WPL method was greater than that by Liu method. Energy balance closure during bare soil period was obviously higher than that during vegetation cover period. The order of the energy balance closure was: bare soilⅠ(before maize seed emergency) > bare soil Ⅱ (before winter wheat seed emergency) > summer maize vegetation period > winter wheat vegetation period.

     

/

返回文章
返回