泸州市参考作物腾发量计算方法比较与修正

为实现参考作物腾发量(ET₀)在气象资料缺失地区的准确计算，探究ET₀简便方法在泸州市的适用性，以Penman-Monteith(PM)法作为标准方法，对Hargreaves(Har)法、FAO24 Blaney-Criddle(FAO24 BC)法、Makkink(Mak)法、Priestley-Taylor(PT)法计算的ET₀进行适用性分析，并采用线性关系和贝叶斯公式对各方法进行修正。通过误差分析得出，Har、PT法在研究区的适用性较好，RMSE在0.5～1.1 mm/d、PE在10%～15%,误差相对较小，且利用线性关系修正比贝叶斯公式好，线性修正后的Har法、PT法误差分别下降50%、80%左右，可以看出PT法的修正效果比Har法更理想。采用线性关系修正后的PT法更适合代替PM法计算气象资料缺失时的ET₀,可为估算作物需水量提供理论依据和数据支持。

Comparison and Correction of Calculation Methods of Reference Crop Evapotranspiration in Luzhou City

In order to obtain accurate calculation results of reference crop evapotranspiration（ET0）in the areas with missing meteorological data，and to explore applicability of ET0 simple methods in Luzhou City，Penman-Monteith（PM）method was employed as standard method to compare ET0 calculated by simple methods including Hargreaves（Har）method，FAO24 Blaney-Criddle（FAO24 BC）method，Makkink（Mak）method and Priestley-Taylor（PT）method.The linear relationship and Bayesian formula were used to correct each method.Through error analysis，it was concluded that Har and PT methods had good performances with relatively small errors in study area.The RMSE was 0.5~1.1 mm/d and PE was 10%~15%，correction of linear relationship was better than the Bayesian formula.After linear correction，error of the Har and PT methods was reduced by about 50% and 80%，respectively.It could be obtained that correction effect of PT method was much better than the Har method.Therefore，PT method corrected by linear relationship was more suitable to replace PM method to calculate ET0 when meteorological data was missing，and it could provide theoretical basis and data support for estimating crop water requirements in the future.