中国农业气象 ›› 2024, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (04): 351-362.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6362.2024.04.003

• 农业生态环境栏目 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于主成分分析淮北五道沟日尺度地温对气象要素的响应

孙博,王怡宁,吕海深,王发信,朱永华,周超,高佩,方晶晶,卢怡然   

  1. 1.河海大学,南京 210098;2.南京水利科学研究院,南京 210029;3.安徽省(水利部淮河水利委员会)水利科学研究院五道沟水文实验站,蚌埠 233000
  • 收稿日期:2023-05-30 出版日期:2024-04-20 发布日期:2024-04-16
  • 作者简介:孙博,E-mail:1074855007@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金重点项目(41830752);国家自然科学基金面上项目(42071033);国家自然科学基金青年项目(52109029)

Daily Soil Temperature Response to Meteorological Factors in Wudaogou Region of Huaibei Based on Principal Component

SUN Bo, WANG Yi-ning, LV Hai-shen, WANG Fa-xin, ZHU Yong-hua, ZHOU Chao, GAO Pei, FANG Jing-jing, LU Yi-ran   

  1. 1. Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China; 2. Nanjing Hydraulic Research Institute, Nanjing 210029; 3. Anhui & Huaihe River Institute of Hydraulic Research, Wudaogou Hydrological Experimental Station, Bengbu 233000
  • Received:2023-05-30 Online:2024-04-20 Published:2024-04-16

摘要: 为探讨淮北地区地温对气象要素的响应关系,对未来地温进行预测,利用五道沟水文实验站1986−2021年0−320cm深度土壤内9个土层地温和8个逐日气象要素(平均气温、水面蒸发、日照时数、降水量、1.5m高度平均风速、平均空气相对湿度、绝对湿度和水汽压力差)实测资料,分析地温与气象要素的相关关系,利用主成分分析法对8个气象要素进行数据降维,以提取出的主成分作为输入构建PCA−BP地温模拟模型,并与仅使用平均气温作为输入的BP神经网络模型进行对比分析。结果表明:(1)除平均气温外,地温还受水面蒸发、绝对湿度、水汽压力差等气象要素影响,气象要素对地温的影响随土壤深度的增加而减弱。深层地温对气象要素的响应表现出时滞性特点,滞后时间随土层深度增加而增加。(2)0−80cm处PCA−BP地温模型在预测未来1、3、7d后地温时精度较高,R2(决定系数)均高于0.79。由于地温对气象要素响应的滞后性,预测天数增加时,PCA−BP地温模型对深层地温的预测精度提高。(3)引入新的气象要素作为输入,可提高地温预测模型的精度;与仅使用平均气温作为输入的BP模型对比,PCA−BP模型在预测未来3d和7d后地温表现更优。

关键词: 地温, 气象要素, 响应关系, 预测模型, 滞后性

Abstract: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between soil temperature and meteorological factors in the Huaibei region and to make predictions about future soil temperature. To achieve this, authors analyzed 58 years of daily measured data from the Wudaogou Hydrological Experiment Station, spanning from 1986 to 2021. The data included soil temperature readings from 9 soil layers at depths of 0-320cm, as well as measurements of 8 meteorological factors: mean air temperature, water surface evaporation, sunshine hours, precipitation, mean wind speed at 1.5m height, mean air relative humidity, absolute humidity, and water vapor pressure difference. The study analyzed the correlations between soil temperature and meteorological factors. The data of the eight meteorological factors were downscaled using Principal Component Analysis. Finally, a PCA−BP soil temperature prediction model was constructed using the extracted principal components as input. The model was compared with a BP neural network model that used only mean air temperature as input. The results indicate that (1) soil temperature is influenced not only by mean air temperature but also by meteorological factors such as water surface evaporation, absolute humidity, and water vapor pressure difference. The influence of meteorological factors on soil temperature decreases with increasing soil depth. The response of deep soil temperature to meteorological factors exhibits a time lag, which increases with soil depth. (2) The accuracy of the PCA−BP soil temperature model in predicting soil temperature at depths of 0-80cm after the 1st, 3rd, and 7th day in the future was high, with an R2 value greater than 0.79. The accuracy of the PCA−BP soil temperature model in predicting deep soil temperature increased as the number of prediction days increased due to the lag effect of soil temperature response to meteorological factors. (3) Adding new meteorological factors as inputs can enhance the accuracy of the soil temperature prediction model. The PCA−BP model outperformed the BP model, which only used the mean air temperature as input, in predicting the soil temperature after the 3rd and 7th predicted days.

Key words: Soil temperature, Meteorological factors, Response relationship, Prediction model, Hysteresis