长江流域资源与环境 >> 2021, Vol. 30 >> Issue (3): 734-744.doi: 10.11870/cjlyzyyhj202103020

• 自然灾害 • 上一篇    下一篇

三种气象干旱指数在四川省的适用性分析

王荣江1,2,李谢辉1* ,周任君2,王磊1   

  1. (1.成都信息工程大学大气科学学院/高原大气与环境四川省重点实验室,四川 成都 610225;2.中国科学技术大学地球和空间科学学院,安徽 合肥 230026)
  • 出版日期:2021-03-20 发布日期:2021-04-07

Applicability Analysis of Three Meteorological Drought Indices in Sichuan Province

WANG Rong-jiang 1, 2, LI Xie-hui 1, ZHOU Ren-jun 2, WANG Lei 1   

  1. (1. Plateau Atmosphere and Environment Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, School of Atmospheric Sciences, Chengdu University of Information Technology, Chengdu 610225, China; 2. School of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China)
  • Online:2021-03-20 Published:2021-04-07

摘要: 受气候和地形等多种因素影响,气象干旱指数在不同地区有着不同的表现。位于长江上游地区的四川省地貌条件复杂,气候类型多样,在使用气象干旱指数进行干旱监测前需要评估其适用性。利用四川省34个气象站点1987~2016年间日降水和日平均气温数据,基于SPI、SPEI和2017年新版国标文件中增加的MCI指数,利用时间序列和空间插值等方法主要对四川省1987~2010年间的干旱过程和干旱年份进行了分析,借助建立的RMSE指标和评分法重点研究了多时间尺度指数反映的干旱强度、干旱范围等与实际旱情的符合度。结果表明:(1)总体上MCI最好,SPI与SPEI效果接近;具体月尺度上,MCI、SPI 3(3个月)、SPEI 3(3个月)是适用性排名的前三位。(2)川东部盆地适合用MCI,川西南山地适合用SPEI 3,川西北高原适合用SPI 6(6个月)或SPI 1(1个月)。(3)SPI、SPEI、MCI指数在川东部盆地的监测误差最小,川西南山地次之,川西北高原最大。

Abstract: Affected by climate, topography and other factors, meteorological drought index has different performance in different areas. Sichuan Province, located in the upper reaches of the Yangtze River, has complex geomorphic conditions and diverse climate types. Its applicability needs to be evaluated before using the meteorological drought index for drought monitoring. In this paper, we used the daily precipitation and daily mean temperature data of 34 meteorological stations in Sichuan Province from 1987 to 2016. Based on SPI index, SPEI index and MCI index (added in the new national standard document of 2017), by using some methods of time series analysis and spatial interpolation, the drought processes and drought years from 1987 to 2010 were analyzed. By means of the established RMSE (Root Mean Square Error) index and scoring method, the consistency of drought intensity and drought range reflected by multi-time scale indices was mainly studied. The results show that: (1) In general, applicability of MCI index is the best and SPI index is close to the SPEI index; On a specific monthly scale, MCI, SPI 3 (3 months), SPEI 3 (3 months), are the top three in the applicable ranking. (2) From the perspective of geographical division, the eastern Sichuan Basin is suitable for MCI index, the southwest mountainous area of Sichuan is suitable for SPI 3 index and the northwest Sichuan Plateau is suitable for two indices of SPI 6 (6 months) and SPI 1 (1 month). (3) The monitoring error of SPI, SPEI and MCI index in eastern Sichuan Basin is the smallest, followed by that in the southwest mountainous area of Sichuan, and the largest in the northwest Sichuan Plateau.

No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 燕乃玲,赵秀华,虞孝感. 长江源区生态功能区划与生态系统管理[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2006, 15(5): 598 -602 .
[2] 李 兰 | 陈正洪 | 刘 敏 | 史瑞琴 | 邓 雯. 2008年低温雨雪冰冻对武汉城市公共交通的影响评估[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2011, 20(11): 1400 .
[3] 李雪松 |夏怡冰. 基于层次分析的武汉城市圈“两型社会”建设绩效评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2012, 21(07): 809 .
[4] 罗友进, 韩国辉, 余端, 李燕, 廖敦秀, 谢永红, 魏朝富. 三峡库区土壤重金属污染评价及其来源[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(08): 1800 .
[5] 冯凡, 赵中华, 陈晨, 田园, 郦倩玉, 龚雄虎, 叶晨昊. 铜绿微囊藻对有机毒物菲的生理生态响应研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(09): 2031 -2041 .
[6] 沈雪, 张露, 张俊飚, 骆兰翎. 稻农低碳生产行为影响因素与引导策略——基于人际行为改进理论的多组比较分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(09): 2042 -2052 .
[7] 马坤, 唐晓岚, 刘思源, 王奕文, 任宇杰, 刘小涵. 长江流域国家级保护地空间分布特征及其国家公园廊道空间策略研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(09): 2053 -2069 .
[8] 张映雪, 王瑞, 屈霄, 夏文彤, 辛未, 郭传波, 陈宇顺.  

不同鱼类养殖方式对长江中游湖泊浮游植物群落的影响及其季节动态 [J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(10): 2260 -2269 .

[9] 舒旺, 王鹏, 肖汉玉, 刘君政, 赵君, 余小芳. 鄱阳湖流域乐安河水化学特征及影响因素[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(03): 681 -690 .
[10] 李景保, 于丹丹, 张瑞, 杨波, 代稳, 何蒙, 徐志. 近61年来长江荆南三口水系连通性演变特征[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(05): 1214 -1224 .