稻田水资源利用效用的灌排模式响应

李玥瑶; 吴梦洋; 操信春; 汤树海

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.03.031

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

稻田水资源利用效用的灌排模式响应

更新时间：2026-04-09

- 稻田水资源利用效用的灌排模式响应
- Experimental Study on Effect of Irrigation Mode on Generalized Water Resources Utility in Paddy Rice Field
- 水土保持学报 2022年36卷第3期页码：213-219
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 河海大学农业科学与工程学院,南京,210098
  2. 涟水县水利科学研究站,江苏,淮安,223200
- 作者简介：
  
  [ "李玥瑶(1999-),女,硕士研究生,主要从事农业水土资源高效利用与保护研究。E-mail:liyueyao131@126.com" ]
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目(51979074)
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.03.031
  中图分类号： S271
- 网络首发：2022-05-27，
  
  纸质出版：2022
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
李玥瑶, 吴梦洋, 操信春, 等. 稻田水资源利用效用的灌排模式响应[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022,36(3):213-219.

LI Yueyao, WU Mengyang, CAO Xinchun, et al. Experimental Study on Effect of Irrigation Mode on Generalized Water Resources Utility in Paddy Rice Field[J]. 2022, 36(3): 213-219.
李玥瑶, 吴梦洋, 操信春, 等. 稻田水资源利用效用的灌排模式响应[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022,36(3):213-219. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.03.031.

LI Yueyao, WU Mengyang, CAO Xinchun, et al. Experimental Study on Effect of Irrigation Mode on Generalized Water Resources Utility in Paddy Rice Field[J]. 2022, 36(3): 213-219. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.03.031.

摘要

为全面揭示稻田水资源利用效用

在观测浅水勤灌(FI)、浅湿灌溉(WI)、控制灌溉(CI)和蓄水控灌(RI)处理试验小区田间水量平衡的基础上

建立了灌溉水、降水消耗通量区分方法及其利用效用评价指标体系

分析了水资源利用效用的灌排模式响应。结果表明:田间灌溉水和降水消耗量、有效利用率及水分生产力均受灌排模式的影响;2017-2018年各处理水资源消耗量为695.9~999.1 mm

其中CI处理水资源消耗量最低

并且消耗结构更加合理。CI处理的灌溉水生产力(IWP

5.392 kg/m3)、降水生产力(PWP

1.539 kg/m3)以及水资源生产力(WRP

1.364 kg/m3)综合表现出其水资源产出能力最强;灌溉效率(IE)、降水利用率(PE)及广义水利用系数(GE)的平均值分别为0.472

0.406

0.693

且处理间[JP]的差异小于产出能力指标。基于灌溉水、降水消耗通量区分的水资源利用效用评价指标体系可以真实而全面地衡量农业生产中水资源表现

特别是在降水频繁的生育季。研究结果可为农业用水效率评价和稻田灌排模式制定提供理论基础。

Abstract

The aim of current study was to reveal the utility of irrigation and rain water resources in paddy fields. Based on the observation of the field water balance in experimental plots with frequent and shallow irrigation (FI)

wet-shallow irrigation (WI)

controlled irrigation (CI) and rain-catching and controlled irrigation (RI) treatments

this study established the classification method of consumption fluxes of irrigation water and precipitation and the evaluation index system of utilization utility. The response of irrigation and drainage mode of water resources utilization was analyzed. The results showed that water consumption

effective utilization rate and water productivity were all affected by irrigation and drainage mode. In 2017-2018

the water resources consumption of all treatments varied in the range of 695.9~999.1 mm

among which the water resources consumption in CI treatment were the lowest

and the consumption structure was more reasonable. The irrigation water productivity (IWP

5.392 kg/m3)

the precipitation productivity (PWP

1.539 kg/m3) and the water resources productivity (WRP

1.364 kg/m3) in CI treatment all showed the highest water resources production capacity. The irrigation efficiency (IE)

precipitation use rate (PE) and generalized water efficiency (GE) were 0.472

0.406 and 0.693

respectively

which the differences among treatments were less than the differences among treatments about productivity indexes. The water resources utility evaluation index system based on the distinction between irrigation water and precipitation consumption flux could truly measure the performance of water resources in agricultural production

especially in the growing season with frequent precipitation. The results can provide theoretical basis for the evaluation of agricultural water resources utility and the formulation of paddy field irrigation and drainage mode.

关键词

Keywords

references

康绍忠.水安全与粮食安全[J].中国生态农业学报,2014,22(8):880-885.

Wang J X, Li Y R, Huang J K, et al. Growing water scarcity, food security and government responses in China[J].Global Food Security,2017,14:9-17.

Zang C F, Liu J, Velde M, et al. Assessment of spatial and temporal patterns of green and blue water flows under natural conditions in inland river basins in Northwest China[J].Hydrology and Earth System Sciences,2012,16(8):2859-2870.

Zhao A Z, Zhu X F, Liu X F, et al. Impacts of land use change and climate variability on green and blue water resources in the Weihe River Basin of northwest China[J].Catena,2016,137:318-327.

Yuan Z, Xu J J, Wang Y Q. Historical and future changes of blue water and green water resources in the Yangtze River source region, China[J].Theoretical and Applied Climatology,2019,138(1):1035-1047.

操信春,任杰,吴梦洋,等.基于水足迹的中国农业用水效果评价[J].农业工程学报,2018,34(5):1-8.

Zhuang Y H, Zhang L, Li S S, et al. Effects and potential of water-saving irrigation for rice production in China[J].Agricultural Water Management,2019,217:374-382.

Hoekstra A Y. Water footprint assessment:Evolvement of a new research field[J].Water Resources Management,2017,31(10):3061-3081.

Edreira J I R, Guilpart N, Sadras V, et al. Water productivity of rainfed maize and wheat:A local to global perspective[J].Agricultural and Forest Meteorology,2018,259:364-373.

高洁,吴普特,谢朋轩,等.灌区蓝绿水资源与作物生产水足迹多时空分布量化分析[J].农业工程学报,2021,37(5):105-112.

Nyathi M K, Mabhaudhi T, Van Halsema G E, et al. Benchmarking nutritional water productivity of twenty vegetables:A review[J].Agricultural Water Management,2019,221:248-259.

Geng Q L, Ren Q F, Nolan R H, et al. Assessing China's agricultural water use efficiency in a green-blue water perspective:A study based on data envelopment analysis[J].Ecological Indicators,2019,96:329-335.

Zhuo L, Hoekstra A Y. The effect of different agricultural management practices on irrigation efficiency, water use efficiency and green and blue water footprint[J].Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering,2017,4(2):185-194.

Wang W W, Wang J G, Cao X C. Water use efficiency and sensitivity assessment for agricultural production system from the water footprint perspective[J].Sustainability,2020,12(22):e9665.

Cao X C, Zeng W, Wu M Y, et al. Water resources efficiency assessment in crop production from the perspective of water footprint[J].Journal of Cleaner Production,2021,309:e127371.

雷波,刘钰,许迪,等.农业水资源利用效用评价研究进展[J].水科学进展,2009,20(5):732-738.

Cao X C, Zeng W, Wu M Y, et al. Hybrid analytical framework for regional agricultural water resource utilization and efficiency evaluation[J].Agricultural Water Management,2020,231:e106027.

Lu Y, Zhang X Y, Chen S Y, et al. Changes in water use efficiency and water footprint in grain production over the past 35 years:A case study in the North China Plain[J].Journal of Cleaner Production,2016,116:71-79.

郭相平,黄双双,王振昌,等.不同灌溉模式对水稻抗倒伏能力影响的试验研究[J].灌溉排水学报,2017,36(5):1-5.

Wu M Y, Cao X C, Guo X P, et al. Assessment of grey water footprint in paddy rice cultivation:Effects of field water management policies[J].Journal of Cleaner Production,2021,313:e127876.

俞双恩,李偲,高世凯,等.水稻控制灌溉模式的节水高产减排控污效果[J].农业工程学报,2018,34(7):128-136.

朱成立,郭相平,刘敏昊,等.水稻沟田协同控制灌排模式的节水减污效应[J].农业工程学报2016,32(3):86-91.

操信春,崔思梦,吴梦洋,等.水足迹框架下稻田水资源利用效率综合评价[J].水利学报,2020,51(10):1189-1198.

Ali M K, Klein K K. Water use efficiency and productivity of the irrigation districts in southern Alberta[J].Water Resources Management,2014,28(10):2751-2766.

操信春,邵光成,王小军,等.中国农业广义水利用系数及时空格局分析[J].水科学进展,2017,28(1):14-21.

浏览量

736

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

灌溉与施肥对稻田氮磷径流流失的影响

大量沼液施灌稻田的氨挥发特征

不同水耕年限稻田土壤水分渗漏与保持特征

江淮丘陵区不同氮肥管理模式下稻田氨挥发损失特征研究

耕作与施肥措施对江淮地区白土理化性质及水稻产量的影响