SiB2和SiB3对高寒草甸和茶树地表能量通量模拟的比较

运用简单生物圈模式第2版(SiB2)和第3版(SiB3),分别模拟青藏高原两个观测站(那曲、安多)和长江三角洲苏州东山观测站的近地面能量收支,并与相应观测数据进行比较研究,分析SiB2、SiB3模拟结果和观测资料产生差异的原因,以此来认识上述地区地表能量收支特点。结果表明,SiB2和SiB3模拟的近地面能量通量与观测数据有较好的一致性。对感热通量,那曲和安多站SiB3比SiB2模拟的结果更接近观测资料,但苏州站SiB2模拟的结果与观测资料更吻合;对潜热通量,SiB3比SiB2模拟的日变化与观测资料更一致,SiB3的模拟结果与观测资料(除苏州站外)相关系数都在0.8以上;对地表土壤热通量,SiB2和SiB3模拟结果与观测数据相关系数都在0.8以上;对净辐射通量,SiB2和SiB3模拟结果与观测资料相关系数接近1.0。与SiB2相比,SiB3引用通用陆面模式的土壤描述并增加对冠层空间层温度、湿度和痕量气体的预报,使其能够改善潜热通量和土壤热通量的模拟,但对复杂下垫面的感热和净辐射通量模拟能力提高不明显。

Study of the surface energy flux at the three different sites over China based on SiB2 and SiB3

Surface fluxes simulated by both the Simple Biosphere Model(SiB) Version 2 and 3,respectively arc compared to the eddy covariance observations at the sites of Naqu and Anduo in the Tibet Plateau and of Suzhou in the Yangtze Delta region for analyzing the reasons of differences between SiB2/SiB3 and observations, and thus realizing the above areas surface energy budget characteristics.The results show that both SiB2 and SiB3 simulated surface energy fluxes were in very good agreements as compared to field observations.Simulation of the sensible heat fluxes at Naqu and Ando sites using SiB3 is closer to the obscrvations than that using SiB2,but in Suzhou sites,closer using SiB2 than that using SiB3.Simulations of the diurnal variation of the latent heat fluxes using SiB3,arc more consistent with the observations, comparing with Sili2.The correlation cocfficicnts between SiB3 simulated and observed values arc above 0.8 except Suzhou site.SiB2 and SiB3 simulations of the ground heat flux were compared with the observed with the correlation above 0.8.Both SiB2 and SiB3 simulated the net radiation flux reasonably, where the corrclations between simulated and observed values arc generally about 1.0.Compared to SiB2,a soil representation based on the Common Land Model and the prognostic calculation of temperature, moisture and trace gases in the canopy air space have been added in SiB3,which resulted in that SiB3 simulates the latent heat flux and ground heat flux better, but not obvious in simulating the sensible heat flux and net radiation flux over the complex underlying surface.