[1]樊玉春,李玥,魏霖静,等.三种胡麻生长模型对现蕾期和青果期干旱胁迫响应能力的比较[J].江苏农业学报,2023,(02):423-433.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2023.02.015]
　FAN Yu-chun,LI Yue,WEI Lin-jing,et al.Comparison of responsiveness of three oil flax growth models to drought stress at budding stage and green fruit stage[J].,2023,(02):423-433.[doi:doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2023.02.015]
点击复制

三种胡麻生长模型对现蕾期和青果期干旱胁迫响应能力的比较()
分享到：

江苏农业学报[ISSN:1006-6977/CN:61-1281/TN]

卷:
期数:
2023年02期
页码:
423-433
栏目:
农业信息工程
出版日期:
2023-04-30

文章信息/Info

Title:
Comparison of responsiveness of three oil flax growth models to drought stress at budding stage and green fruit stage
作者:
樊玉春1; 李玥2; 魏霖静2; 赵霞2; 周慧2
（1.甘肃农业大学理学院，甘肃兰州730070；2.甘肃农业大学信息科学技术学院，甘肃兰州730070）
Author(s):
FAN Yu-chun1; LI Yue2; WEI Lin-jing2; ZHAO Xia2; ZHOU Hui2
（1.College of Science, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou 730070， China；2.College of Information Science and Technology, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou 730070， China）
关键词:
胡麻; 作物生长模型; 干旱胁迫; 现蕾期; 青果期
Keywords:
oil flax; crop growth model; drought stress; budding stage; green fruit stage
分类号:
S565.3
DOI:
doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-4440.2023.02.015
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
本研究利用不同胡麻品种、不同干旱程度的大田试验数据，检验、评估3种作物模型干旱胁迫效应算法的精确性，及其在现蕾期、青果期干旱胁迫处理下对胡麻蒸腾速率、气孔导度、叶面积指数及籽粒产量4个指标的模拟预测能力。模拟结果表明，干旱胁迫使胡麻蒸腾速率、气孔导度、叶面积指数和籽粒产量降低。3种作物模型干旱胁迫效应算法可以模拟出胡麻生理生化指标在各干旱处理下的变化趋势，但模拟效果不够理想。3种干旱胁迫效应算法均低估了籽粒产量。综合考虑，WOFOST模型干旱胁迫效应算法对籽粒产量、蒸腾速率的模拟效果最好，APSIM模型干旱胁迫效应算法对气孔导度的模拟效果最好，DSSAT模型干旱胁迫效应算法对叶面积指数的模拟效果最好。
Abstract:
In this study, the accuracy of drought stress algorithms of three crop models and their ability to simulate and predict four indicators of transpiration rate, stomatal conductance, leaf area index and seed yield of oil flax under drought stress at green fruit stage and budding stage were tested and evaluated using data from field trials with different oil flax varieties and different drought levels. The simulation results showed that drought stress reduced transpiration rate, stomatal conductance, leaf area index and seed yield. The drought stress algorithms of three crop models could simulate the change trends of physiological and biochemical indices of oil flax under every drought treatment, but the simulation was not satisfactory. All three drought stress algorithms underestimated the seed yield. The results indicated that the drought stress algorithm of WOFOST model had the best performance on the simulation of seed yield and transpiration rate, the drought stress algorithm of APSIM model had the best performance on the simulation of stomatal conductance, and the drought stress algorithm of DSSAT model had the best performance on the simulation of leaf area index.

参考文献/References:

[1]赵利,党占海,牛俊义,等. 水分胁迫下不同抗旱类型胡麻苗期生理生化指标变化[J].干旱地区农业研究,2015,33(4):206-211.
[2]何丽,杜彦斌,张金,等. 干旱对胡麻现蕾期光合特性及产量的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2017,45(4):59-64.
[3]李玥,牛俊义,吴兵,等. 基于APSIM的胡麻陇亚杂1号的生育时期模拟模型[J].核农学报,2015,29(5):972-979.
[4]肖浏骏,刘蕾蕾,邱小雷,等. 小麦生长模型对拔节期和孕穗期低温胁迫响应能力的比较[J].中国农业科学, 2021,54(3):504-521.
[5]康佳,李玥,康亮河. 胡麻生理生化代谢指标对干旱胁迫的响应及其模拟模型的研究[J].干旱区地理,2022,45(3):879-889.
[6]李玥,牛俊义,郭丽琢,等. AquaCrop模型在西北胡麻生物量及产量模拟中的应用和验证[J].中国生态农业学报,2014,22(1):93-103.
[7]陈先冠,冯利平,白慧卿,等. 基于小麦模型算法集成平台的三种水分胁迫算法比较[J]. 农业工程学报, 2021, 37(16):47-57.
[8]姚宁,周元刚,宋利兵,等. 不同水分胁迫条件下DSSAT-CERES-Wheat模型的调参与验证[J]. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(12):138-150.
[9]刘健,姚宁,吝海霞,等. 冬小麦物候期对土壤水分胁迫的响应机制与模拟[J].农业工程学报,2016,32(21):115-124.
[10]CHEN Y, MAREK G W, MAREK T H, et al. Assessing soil and water assessment tool plant stress algorithms using full and deficit irrigation treatments[J]. Agronomy Journal, 2019, 111(3): 1266-1280.
[11]SASEENDRAN S A, AHUJA L R, MA L, et al. Current water deficit stress simulations in selected agricultural system models[J]. Response of Crops to Limited Water: Understanding and Modeling Water Stress Effects on Plant Growth Processes, 2008, 1: 1-38.
[12]茹晓雅,李广,闫丽娟,等. 基于APSIM模型模拟水氮调控对旱地春小麦产量的影响[J].草业科学,2019,36(9):2342-2350.
[13]HOLZWORTH D P, HUTH N I, DEVOIL P G, et al. APSIM-evolution towards a new generation of agricultural systems simulation[J]. Environmental Modelling and Software,2014,62: 327-350.
[14]刘沉默. 旱作条件下APSIM模型的适应性评价及应用——以山西省为例[D].太原：山西农业大学,2019.
[15]穆青云,李俊,何亮,等. 青藏高原冬小麦生产潜力及其对气候变化的响应[J].干旱区资源与环境,2021,35(7):92-99.
[16]王一明. 干旱条件下基于WOFOST模型与遥感数据同化的玉米产量模拟改进研究[D].北京：中国科学院大学, 2018.
[17]魏玉清,沈强云,郝正刚. 基于DSSAT模型和正交试验相结合的春小麦灌溉模式优化研究[J].节水灌溉,2019(1):6-11，17.
[18]高言. 基于改进DSSAT-CERES模型的夏玉米地膜覆盖生长模拟[D].杨凌：西北农林科技大学,2021.
[19]付春晓,龚时宏,王建东,等. 改进CERES-Maize模型在玉米膜下滴灌模式下的适用性[J].排灌机械工程学报,2018,36(11):1076-1080.
[20]HE J, CAI H, BAI J. Irrigation scheduling based on CERES-Wheat model for spring wheat production in the Minqin Oasis in Northwest China[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2013, 128: 19-31.
[21]HE D, WANG E, WANG J, et al. Uncertainty in canola phenology modelling induced by cultivar parameterization and its impact on simulated yield[J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2017,232: 163-175.
[22]张伟欣,吴茜,孙传亮,等. 油菜株型模拟研究进展[J]. 江苏农业学报,2022,38(2):549-557.
[23]纪洪亭,赵韩伟,王勇,等. 基于数学模型的向日葵穴盘苗生长动态特征分析[J]. 江苏农业学报,2022,38(1):135-142.
[24]陈永快,黄语燕,兰婕,等. 基于辐热积的NFT栽培生菜生长模型[J]. 江苏农业科学,2021,49(19):201-204,215.
[25]刘竞择. 水分胁迫对赤霞珠葡萄不同叶龄叶片光合特性的影响[D].银川：宁夏大学,2020.
[26]李正鹏. 基于田间试验和DSSAT模型的关中冬小麦水氮管理优化[D].杨凌：西北农林科技大学,2017.
[27]PRASAD P V V, PISIPATI S R, RISTIC Z, et al. Impact of nighttime temperature on physiology and growth of spring wheat[J]. Crop Science,2008,48(6):2372-2380.
[28]HAO B, XUE Q, MAREK T H, et al. Soil water extraction, water use, and grain yield by drought-tolerant maize on the Texas High Plains[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2015, 155: 11-21.
[29]TODOROVIC M, ALBRIZIO R, ZIVOTIC L, et al. Assessment of AquaCrop, CropSyst, and WOFOST models in the simulation of sunflower growth under different water regimes[J]. Agronomy Journal, 2009, 101(3): 509-521.
[30]ANTLE J M, BASSO B, CONANT R T, et al. Towards a new generation of agricultural system data, models and knowledge products: design and improvement[J]. Agricultural Systems, 2017, 155: 255-268.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期：2022-06-15 基金项目：国家自然科学基金项目（32060437、31360315）；甘肃农业大学青年导师基金项目（GAU-QDFC-2020-12）；甘肃省自然科学基金项目（18JR3RA165）作者简介：樊玉春（1997-），男，河北张家口人，硕士研究生，研究方向为应用统计大数据分析。(E-mail)245309763@qq.com 通讯作者：李玥，(E-mail)liyue@gsau.edu.cn
更新日期/Last Update: 2023-05-12