首页> 外文学位 >Alfalfa reference crop evapotranspiration in Colorado and its use for irrigation scheduling.
【24h】

Alfalfa reference crop evapotranspiration in Colorado and its use for irrigation scheduling.

机译:苜蓿在科罗拉多州的参考作物蒸散量及其在灌溉计划中的应用。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The goal of irrigation scheduling is efficient use of water such that water is applied to the field for optimal crop production. Previous studies have optimized irrigation scheduling using different models to manage sprinkler irrigation. This research evaluated approaches for obtaining alfalfa reference evapotranspiration (ETr) and its use in a new irrigation scheduling model for a furrow irrigation system. The objectives of this research were to: 1) Compare seasonal trends of daily ETr from the American Society of Civil Engineers Standardized Penman-Monteith (ASCE-SPM) equation and the Penman-Kimberly (PK) equation along a climatic gradient in Colorado, 2) Verify the agreement between calculated ETr from the ASCE-SPM equation and measured ETr from a lysimeter during the 2010 season for the Arkansas Valley of Colorado and correct the lysimeter ETr for alfalfa overgrowth, and 3) Test the ASCE-SPM ETr along with a locally adapted Kcr curve for corn in an irrigation scheduling spreadsheet tool for simulating the daily soil water deficit of furrow irrigated corn in northeast Colorado.;The two reference ET equations were compared using R2, Root-Mean-Square Error (RMSE), Relative Error (RE), and index of agreement (d). The R2 values ranged from 0.93 to 0.99; d ranged from 0.98 to 0.99, RMSE ranged from 0.29 to 0.75 mm/d, and RE ranged from -6.35 to 1.91 %. In a comparison of the ASCE-SPM and PK equations at the Fort Collins and Rogers Mesa sites in 2011, differences were observed between the energy balance and aerodynamic terms of each equation. The energy budget calculated by the ASCE-SPM was generally 28% lower than the energy budget calculated by the PK equation at both locations for 2011. On the other hand, the aerodynamic term calculated by the ASCE-SPM equation was from 27 -- 28 % higher than the aerodynamic term calculated from PK during most of 2011 at both locations.;The second objective of this research compared alfalfa ET measured with a lysimeter in the center of a 4.06 ha furrow irrigated field at the Colorado State University Arkansas Valley Research Center in Rocky Ford, CO to the calculated values from the ASCE-SPM equation in periods of reference conditions in 2010. Four days were selected when alfalfa in the lysimeter was 50 -- 55 cm tall, unstressed, completely covering the ground, but with its canopy extending beyond the outer walls of the lysimeter. On these dates, hourly lysimeter ETr was 0.08 to 0.11 mm/h higher than ASCE-SPM ET r. The theoretical surface area of the lysimeter was 9.181 m 2, while the observed effective canopy area was up to 12.461 m 2 due to overgrowth. Surface area corrections for the overgrowth increased the index of agreement (d) between hourly lysimeter ETr and ASCE-SPM ETr from the 0.96 -- 0.98 range to the 0.99 -- 1.0 range. These results showed that it is important to use the correct effective canopy area when computing ETr from a weighing lysimeter.;The CIS model for calculating water deficit under a furrow irrigation system with the addition of some data from field measurements such as soil moisture content, gross irrigation, climate data, and plant height and leaf area index generated good results. The water deficit under corn was simulated at the Limited Irrigation Research Farm (LIRF) located near Greeley, Colorado during the years 2010, 2011 and 2012. Daily corn crop ET (ETc) calculated from daily ASCE-SPM ETr and a locally-derived crop coefficient curve (Kcr) were used by the CIS for daily soil water deficit calculations via water balance. This data was used to test a furrow irrigation system via the CIS model and to simulate the field irrigation by predicting the time and the amount of water for the next irrigation. The results showed good agreement between calculated and measured deficits where index of agreement (d) ranged from 0.5 to 0.99 for most years of this study, specifically when measurements of soil water content (SWC) were inserted bi-weekly or monthly. The RMSE did not exceed 2.54 mm when using SWC once per season in 2011, while bi-weekly measurements recorded d to be 0.96 in 2010, 0.99 in 2011 and 0.70 in 2012. Also, the CIS showed that irrigation water usage could be reduced by 30 to 50% through use of CIS.
机译:灌溉计划的目标是有效利用水,以便将水应用于田间以实现最佳作物生产。先前的研究使用不同的模型来管理喷灌,从而优化了灌溉计划。这项研究评估了获取苜蓿参考蒸腾量(ETr)的方法及其在犁沟灌溉系统的新灌溉调度模型中的应用。这项研究的目的是:1)比较美国土木工程师协会标准Penman-Monteith(ASCE-SPM)方程和Penman-Kimberly(PK)方程沿科罗拉多州气候梯度的每日ETr的季节性趋势,2 )验证2010年季节科罗拉多州阿肯色山谷从ASCE-SPM公式计算出的ETr与从溶渗仪测得的ETr之间的一致性,并校正苜蓿过度生长的溶渗仪ETr,并3)测试ASCE-SPM ETr和在灌溉日程电子表格工具中模拟玉米局部灌溉的Kcr曲线,以模拟科罗拉多州东北部犁沟灌溉的玉米的每日土壤水分亏缺。使用R2,根均方误差(RMSE),相对误差比较了两个参考ET方程(RE)和协议索引(d)。 R2值介于0.93至0.99之间; d为0.98至0.99,RMSE为0.29至0.75 mm / d,RE为-6.35至1.91%。在2011年柯林斯堡和罗杰斯·梅萨基地的ASCE-SPM和PK方程的比较中,发现每个方程的能量平衡和空气动力学项之间存在差异。通过ASCE-SPM计算的能源预算通常比通过PK方程计算的2011年两个地点的能源预算低28%。另一方面,通过ASCE-SPM方程计算的空气动力学项为27-28比2011年大部分时间在两个地点的PK计算出的空气动力项高%。这项研究的第二个目标是比较科罗拉多州立大学阿肯色谷研究中心在4.06公顷犁沟灌溉田中心的苜蓿ET与溶渗仪测得的值在Rocky Ford,CO中使用2010年参考条件下的ASCE-SPM公式计算得出的值。当溶血仪中的苜蓿高度为50-55 cm,无应力,完全覆盖地面时,选择了四天檐篷延伸超出测渗仪的外壁。在这些日期,每小时的溶渗仪ETr比ASCE-SPM ET r高0.08至0.11 mm / h。测渗仪的理论表面积为9.181 m 2,而由于过度生长,观察到的有效冠层面积高达12.461 m 2。过度生长的表面积校正将每小时溶渗仪ETr和ASCE-SPM ETr之间的一致性指数(d)从0.96-0.98增至0.99-1.0范围。这些结果表明,从称重溶渗仪计算ETr时,使用正确的有效冠层面积非常重要。CIS模型用于在犁沟灌溉系统下计算缺水量,并增加了田间测量的一些数据,例如土壤含水量,总灌溉,气候数据以及植物高度和叶面积指数均产生了良好的效果。玉米下的水分亏缺是在2010年,2011年和2012年在科罗拉多州格里利附近的有限灌溉研究农场(LIRF)进行模拟的。每日玉米作物ET(ETc)是根据每日ASCE-SPM ETr和本地作物得出的CIS使用系数曲线(Kcr)通过水平衡计算每日土壤水分亏缺。该数据用于通过CIS模型测试犁沟灌溉系统,并通过预测下一次灌溉的时间和水量来模拟田间灌溉。结果表明,计算得出的赤字与实测赤字之间有很好的一致性,在本研究的大多数年份中,协议(d)的范围从0.5到0.99,特别是每两周或每月插入一次土壤含水量(SWC)时。 2011年每个季节使用SWC一次时,RMSE不会超过2.54毫米,而双周测量记录的d分别为2010年的0.96、2011年的0.99和2012年的0.70。此外,CIS显示,灌溉用水量可减少30%至50%通过使用CIS。

著录项

  • 作者单位

    Colorado State University.;

  • 授予单位 Colorado State University.;
  • 学科 Plant sciences.;Soil sciences.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2015
  • 页码 112 p.
  • 总页数 112
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号