基于SMAR模型和回归方法估算复杂地形源区根区土壤湿度

IF 5.6 1区 农林科学 Q1 SOIL SCIENCE Geoderma Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.geoderma.2024.117144
Yongliang Qi , Bihang Fan , Yaling Zhang , Yanjia Jiang , Yuanyuan Huang , Elizabeth W. Boyer , Carlos R. Mello , Li Guo , Hongxia Li
{"title":"基于SMAR模型和回归方法估算复杂地形源区根区土壤湿度","authors":"Yongliang Qi ,&nbsp;Bihang Fan ,&nbsp;Yaling Zhang ,&nbsp;Yanjia Jiang ,&nbsp;Yuanyuan Huang ,&nbsp;Elizabeth W. Boyer ,&nbsp;Carlos R. Mello ,&nbsp;Li Guo ,&nbsp;Hongxia Li","doi":"10.1016/j.geoderma.2024.117144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Obtaining accurate information regarding root zone soil moisture (RZSM) is a critical element of effective hydrological and agricultural management practices. Previous studies have relied on surface soil moisture (SSM) values, which are more easily measured, to estimate RZSM using the Soil Moisture Analytical Relationship (SMAR) model or regression method. However, the performance of these two types of methods in areas with complex topography still needs more exploration. Here, we assess the accuracy of these two types of methods in a forested mountainous catchment, using daily SSM measurements from 32 monitoring sites. The results show that both methods are capable of accurately estimating RZSM with a high NSE (&gt;0.950) during the validation period. Additionally, they exhibit excellent model transferability at ungauged sites. Spatially, both methods perform better in drier areas than in wetter areas. Temporally, both methods are better in the wet–cold season than in the dry–warm season. Overall, both methods demonstrate comparable performance in the catchment, with NSE values of 0.986 and 0.951 during the validation period, respectively. The regression method is more suited to complex hydropedological environments characterized by long-term soil moisture monitoring and nonlinear hydropedological behaviors. Conversely, the SMAR model is better suited for flat areas and less spatial variability in microtopography. Moreover, the estimation of RZSM by both methods is influenced not only by soil moisture conditions but also by local factors including terrain topography, soil depth, and the degree of subsurface hydrological connectivity. This study adds to our understanding of RZSM estimation from SSM in complex terrain and will act as a reference for selecting appropriate methods of RZSM estimation. The results of this study underscore a discernible relationship between surface and deep soil moisture across varying spatial and temporal scales.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12511,"journal":{"name":"Geoderma","volume":"453 ","pages":"Article 117144"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Estimating root zone soil moisture using the SMAR model and regression method at a headwater catchment with complex terrain\",\"authors\":\"Yongliang Qi ,&nbsp;Bihang Fan ,&nbsp;Yaling Zhang ,&nbsp;Yanjia Jiang ,&nbsp;Yuanyuan Huang ,&nbsp;Elizabeth W. Boyer ,&nbsp;Carlos R. Mello ,&nbsp;Li Guo ,&nbsp;Hongxia Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.geoderma.2024.117144\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Obtaining accurate information regarding root zone soil moisture (RZSM) is a critical element of effective hydrological and agricultural management practices. Previous studies have relied on surface soil moisture (SSM) values, which are more easily measured, to estimate RZSM using the Soil Moisture Analytical Relationship (SMAR) model or regression method. However, the performance of these two types of methods in areas with complex topography still needs more exploration. Here, we assess the accuracy of these two types of methods in a forested mountainous catchment, using daily SSM measurements from 32 monitoring sites. The results show that both methods are capable of accurately estimating RZSM with a high NSE (&gt;0.950) during the validation period. Additionally, they exhibit excellent model transferability at ungauged sites. Spatially, both methods perform better in drier areas than in wetter areas. Temporally, both methods are better in the wet–cold season than in the dry–warm season. Overall, both methods demonstrate comparable performance in the catchment, with NSE values of 0.986 and 0.951 during the validation period, respectively. The regression method is more suited to complex hydropedological environments characterized by long-term soil moisture monitoring and nonlinear hydropedological behaviors. Conversely, the SMAR model is better suited for flat areas and less spatial variability in microtopography. Moreover, the estimation of RZSM by both methods is influenced not only by soil moisture conditions but also by local factors including terrain topography, soil depth, and the degree of subsurface hydrological connectivity. This study adds to our understanding of RZSM estimation from SSM in complex terrain and will act as a reference for selecting appropriate methods of RZSM estimation. The results of this study underscore a discernible relationship between surface and deep soil moisture across varying spatial and temporal scales.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geoderma\",\"volume\":\"453 \",\"pages\":\"Article 117144\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geoderma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016706124003732\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOIL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geoderma","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016706124003732","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOIL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

获得根区土壤水分的准确信息是有效的水文和农业管理实践的关键要素。以往的研究主要是利用土壤湿度分析关系(SMAR)模型或回归方法,利用更容易测量的表层土壤湿度(SSM)值来估算RZSM。然而,这两种方法在复杂地形地区的性能仍有待进一步探索。在这里,我们使用来自32个监测点的每日SSM测量值来评估这两种方法在森林山区集水区的准确性。结果表明,两种方法在验证期内均能较准确地估计出RZSM,且NSE值较高(>0.950)。此外,它们在未测量的位置表现出良好的模型可移植性。从空间上看,两种方法在干旱地区的效果都优于湿润地区。从时间上看,两种方法在湿冷季节均优于干暖季节。总体而言,两种方法在流域中表现出相当的性能,验证期间的NSE值分别为0.986和0.951。回归方法更适合于长期土壤水分监测和非线性水文行为的复杂水文环境。相反,SMAR模型更适合平坦地区和微地形空间变异性较小的地区。此外,两种方法估算的RZSM不仅受土壤湿度条件的影响,还受地形地形、土壤深度和地下水文连通性等局部因素的影响。本研究增加了我们对复杂地形下基于SSM的RZSM估计的认识,并将为选择合适的RZSM估计方法提供参考。本研究的结果强调了地表和深层土壤水分在不同时空尺度上的明显关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Estimating root zone soil moisture using the SMAR model and regression method at a headwater catchment with complex terrain
Obtaining accurate information regarding root zone soil moisture (RZSM) is a critical element of effective hydrological and agricultural management practices. Previous studies have relied on surface soil moisture (SSM) values, which are more easily measured, to estimate RZSM using the Soil Moisture Analytical Relationship (SMAR) model or regression method. However, the performance of these two types of methods in areas with complex topography still needs more exploration. Here, we assess the accuracy of these two types of methods in a forested mountainous catchment, using daily SSM measurements from 32 monitoring sites. The results show that both methods are capable of accurately estimating RZSM with a high NSE (>0.950) during the validation period. Additionally, they exhibit excellent model transferability at ungauged sites. Spatially, both methods perform better in drier areas than in wetter areas. Temporally, both methods are better in the wet–cold season than in the dry–warm season. Overall, both methods demonstrate comparable performance in the catchment, with NSE values of 0.986 and 0.951 during the validation period, respectively. The regression method is more suited to complex hydropedological environments characterized by long-term soil moisture monitoring and nonlinear hydropedological behaviors. Conversely, the SMAR model is better suited for flat areas and less spatial variability in microtopography. Moreover, the estimation of RZSM by both methods is influenced not only by soil moisture conditions but also by local factors including terrain topography, soil depth, and the degree of subsurface hydrological connectivity. This study adds to our understanding of RZSM estimation from SSM in complex terrain and will act as a reference for selecting appropriate methods of RZSM estimation. The results of this study underscore a discernible relationship between surface and deep soil moisture across varying spatial and temporal scales.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Geoderma
Geoderma 农林科学-土壤科学
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
6.60%
发文量
597
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: Geoderma - the global journal of soil science - welcomes authors, readers and soil research from all parts of the world, encourages worldwide soil studies, and embraces all aspects of soil science and its associated pedagogy. The journal particularly welcomes interdisciplinary work focusing on dynamic soil processes and functions across space and time.
期刊最新文献
Impacts of groundwater storage variability on soil salinization in a semi-arid agricultural plain Variations in body size and reproductive mode of oribatid mites along an altitudinal gradient in a temperate mountain region Soil phoD-harboring bacteria mediate the responses of phosphorus availability to N addition and mowing among soil aggregates Creating soil districts for Australia based on pedogenon mapping Field-based soil extractions capture more amino acids that are lost during short-term storage
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1