降雨侵蚀力估算:使用巴西东南部数据的方法之间的比较和统计评估

IF 1.9 4区 农林科学 Q3 SOIL SCIENCE Revista Brasileira De Ciencia Do Solo Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.36783/18069657rbcs20210122
D. P. Cardoso, J. C. Avanzi, D. Ferreira, S. Acuña-Guzman, M. L. Silva, F. Pires, N. Curi
{"title":"降雨侵蚀力估算:使用巴西东南部数据的方法之间的比较和统计评估","authors":"D. P. Cardoso, J. C. Avanzi, D. Ferreira, S. Acuña-Guzman, M. L. Silva, F. Pires, N. Curi","doi":"10.36783/18069657rbcs20210122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rainfall erosivity (R factor) is one of the six factors of the Universal Soil Loss Equation, being calculated based on the product of rainfall kinetic energy multiplied by its 30-minute maximum intensity. However, the lack of detailed and reliable rainfall data in many parts of the world has driven the use of other methods to estimate rainfall erosivity based on daily, monthly or annual data. These methods still need to be assessed to determine if their estimates are consistent with the standard method for calculating rainfall erosivity. This study aimed to select a consistent method for such replacement in Brazilian conditions without access the rainfall intensity data. The tested methods included: modified Fournier, MF; modified Fournier by Zhang, MF-Z; modified Fournier by Men, MF-M; Rainfall Disaggregation, RD; TRMM Satellite with modified Fournier coefficient, TRMM-F; and TRMM Satellite with monthly rainfall, TRMM-M. The rainfall data were obtained from the USP Meteorological Station, referring to the period from 2009 to 2015. The analyses were performed according to the Additive Main effects and Multiplicative Interaction (AMMI) model and Scott-Knott statistical tests. Considering the 1:1 line, all methods had a good adjustment, presenting similar behavior in relation to the standard method. The methods behaved differently for monthly and annual periods. The MF method proved to be capable of consistently replacing the standard method in all aforementioned situations. Considering the driest period, any method can be used. For annual rainfall erosivity estimation, the RD, MF, TRMM-F and TRMM-M methods can be applied; highlighting that the TRMM-based methods are optimal for locations without on-site rain gauges. Additionally, it was computed that the modified Fournier by Men and the modified Fournier by Zhang underestimated and overestimated the rainfall erosivity, respectively.","PeriodicalId":21215,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira De Ciencia Do Solo","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rainfall erosivity estimation: Comparison and statistical assessment among methods using data from Southeastern Brazil\",\"authors\":\"D. P. Cardoso, J. C. Avanzi, D. Ferreira, S. Acuña-Guzman, M. L. Silva, F. Pires, N. Curi\",\"doi\":\"10.36783/18069657rbcs20210122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Rainfall erosivity (R factor) is one of the six factors of the Universal Soil Loss Equation, being calculated based on the product of rainfall kinetic energy multiplied by its 30-minute maximum intensity. However, the lack of detailed and reliable rainfall data in many parts of the world has driven the use of other methods to estimate rainfall erosivity based on daily, monthly or annual data. These methods still need to be assessed to determine if their estimates are consistent with the standard method for calculating rainfall erosivity. This study aimed to select a consistent method for such replacement in Brazilian conditions without access the rainfall intensity data. The tested methods included: modified Fournier, MF; modified Fournier by Zhang, MF-Z; modified Fournier by Men, MF-M; Rainfall Disaggregation, RD; TRMM Satellite with modified Fournier coefficient, TRMM-F; and TRMM Satellite with monthly rainfall, TRMM-M. The rainfall data were obtained from the USP Meteorological Station, referring to the period from 2009 to 2015. The analyses were performed according to the Additive Main effects and Multiplicative Interaction (AMMI) model and Scott-Knott statistical tests. Considering the 1:1 line, all methods had a good adjustment, presenting similar behavior in relation to the standard method. The methods behaved differently for monthly and annual periods. The MF method proved to be capable of consistently replacing the standard method in all aforementioned situations. Considering the driest period, any method can be used. For annual rainfall erosivity estimation, the RD, MF, TRMM-F and TRMM-M methods can be applied; highlighting that the TRMM-based methods are optimal for locations without on-site rain gauges. Additionally, it was computed that the modified Fournier by Men and the modified Fournier by Zhang underestimated and overestimated the rainfall erosivity, respectively.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21215,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Brasileira De Ciencia Do Solo\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Brasileira De Ciencia Do Solo\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36783/18069657rbcs20210122\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOIL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira De Ciencia Do Solo","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36783/18069657rbcs20210122","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOIL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

降雨侵蚀力(R因子)是通用水土流失方程的六个因子之一,由降雨动能乘以其30分钟最大强度计算得到。然而,由于世界上许多地方缺乏详细和可靠的降雨数据,因此采用了基于日、月或年数据的其他方法来估计降雨侵蚀力。这些方法仍然需要评估,以确定它们的估计是否与计算降雨侵蚀力的标准方法一致。本研究的目的是在巴西没有降雨强度数据的情况下选择一种一致的替代方法。检测方法包括:改良富尼尔,MF;修正Fournier by Zhang, MF-Z;Men改良的Fournier, MF-M;降雨分解;RD;修正傅里叶系数TRMM卫星;和TRMM卫星的月降雨量。降雨量数据来自USP气象站,时间为2009 - 2015年。根据可加性主效应和乘法相互作用(AMMI)模型和Scott-Knott统计检验进行分析。考虑到1:1线,所有方法都有很好的调整,表现出与标准方法相似的行为。月度和年度期间的方法表现不同。事实证明,MF方法能够在上述所有情况下始终如一地取代标准方法。考虑到最干旱时期,任何方法都可以使用。对于年降雨侵蚀力估算,可采用RD、MF、TRMM-F和TRMM-M方法;强调基于trmm的方法对于没有现场雨量计的地点是最佳的。另外,Men修正的Fournier和Zhang修正的Fournier分别低估和高估了降雨侵蚀力。
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
Rainfall erosivity estimation: Comparison and statistical assessment among methods using data from Southeastern Brazil
Rainfall erosivity (R factor) is one of the six factors of the Universal Soil Loss Equation, being calculated based on the product of rainfall kinetic energy multiplied by its 30-minute maximum intensity. However, the lack of detailed and reliable rainfall data in many parts of the world has driven the use of other methods to estimate rainfall erosivity based on daily, monthly or annual data. These methods still need to be assessed to determine if their estimates are consistent with the standard method for calculating rainfall erosivity. This study aimed to select a consistent method for such replacement in Brazilian conditions without access the rainfall intensity data. The tested methods included: modified Fournier, MF; modified Fournier by Zhang, MF-Z; modified Fournier by Men, MF-M; Rainfall Disaggregation, RD; TRMM Satellite with modified Fournier coefficient, TRMM-F; and TRMM Satellite with monthly rainfall, TRMM-M. The rainfall data were obtained from the USP Meteorological Station, referring to the period from 2009 to 2015. The analyses were performed according to the Additive Main effects and Multiplicative Interaction (AMMI) model and Scott-Knott statistical tests. Considering the 1:1 line, all methods had a good adjustment, presenting similar behavior in relation to the standard method. The methods behaved differently for monthly and annual periods. The MF method proved to be capable of consistently replacing the standard method in all aforementioned situations. Considering the driest period, any method can be used. For annual rainfall erosivity estimation, the RD, MF, TRMM-F and TRMM-M methods can be applied; highlighting that the TRMM-based methods are optimal for locations without on-site rain gauges. Additionally, it was computed that the modified Fournier by Men and the modified Fournier by Zhang underestimated and overestimated the rainfall erosivity, respectively.
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
Revista Brasileira De Ciencia Do Solo
Revista Brasileira De Ciencia Do Solo 农林科学-土壤科学
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
11.80%
发文量
32
审稿时长
9-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo is a scientific journal published by the Brazilian Society for Soil Science (SBCS), founded in 1947, and is responsible for the propagation of original and inedited technical-scientific work of interest for Soil Science. Contributions must not have been previously published or submit to other periodicals, with the only exception of articles presented in summarized form at professional meetings. Literature reviews are accepted when solicited by the Editorial Board.
期刊最新文献
Adapting the land agricultural suitability assessment scheme for drylands edaphoclimatic conditions Educational procedures guided by emancipatory principles for education on soils in higher education: A proposal Conservation agriculture practices in a peanut cropping system: Effects on pod yield and soil penetration resistance Biogenic and physicogenic aggregates as indicators of quality in soils with sandy texture in areas of organic agriculture Identifying appropriate reference ecosystems based on soil indicators to evaluate postmining reclamation: A multivariate framework
×
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