欢迎访问《应用生态学报》官方网站,今天是 分享到:

应用生态学报 ›› 2019, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (1): 198-208.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201901.021

• 研究论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

四川盆区直播与移栽水稻旱灾风险比较

杨世民1,郭翔2,3*,王明田4,5   

  1. 1四川农业大学农学院, 成都 611130;
    2中国气象局成都高原气象研究所/高原与盆地暴雨旱涝灾害四川省重点实验室, 成都 610072;
    3四川省农业气象中心, 成都 610072;
    4四川省气象台, 成都 610072;
    5南方丘区节水农业研究四川省重点实验室, 成都 610066
  • 收稿日期:2018-07-02 修回日期:2018-11-05 出版日期:2019-01-20 发布日期:2019-01-20
  • 通讯作者: gxcbb@vip.qq.com
  • 作者简介:杨世民, 男, 1965年生, 副教授. 主要从事水稻栽培技术推广和水稻生理等研究. E-mail: yangshimin1@163.com
  • 基金资助:

    本文由国家重点研发计划项目(2016YFD0300108)和高原与盆地暴雨旱涝灾害四川省重点实验室科技发展基金项目(省重点实验室2018-重点-05-01)资助

Comparison of drought risk between transplanting and direct-sowing rice in the Sichuan Basin, China

YANG Shi-min1, GUO Xiang2,3*, WANG Ming-tian4,5   

  1. 1College of Agriculture, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China;
    2Institute of Plateau Meteorology, China Meteorological Administration/Sichuan Province Key Laboratory of Heavy Rain and Drought-Flood Disasters in Plateau and Basin, Chengdu 610072, China;
    3Sichuan Province Agro-meteorological Center, Chengdu 610072, China;
    4Sichuan Meteorological Observatory, Chengdu 610072, China;
    5Sichuan Province Key Laboratory of Water-Saving Agriculture in Southern Hill Area, Chengdu 610066, China
  • Received:2018-07-02 Revised:2018-11-05 Online:2019-01-20 Published:2019-01-20
  • Supported by:

    This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (2016YFD0300108) and the Scientific and Technological Development Foundation of Heavy Rain and Drought-Flood Disasters in Plateau and Basin Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province (Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province-2018-Key-05-01).2018-07-02 Received, 2018-11-05 Accepted.*

摘要: 定量评价和比较四川盆区移栽水稻与直播水稻各发育阶段及全生育期干旱灾害风险,能为各区域水稻防旱减灾生产技术转型和推广提供科学依据.基于自然灾害风险理论和水稻干旱灾害风险形成机理,利用四川盆区1961—2017年的气象资料、水稻生产观测资料、农业统计资料和基础地理信息,对移栽和直播水稻全生育期和播种-拔节、拔节-孕穗、孕穗-齐穗、齐穗-成熟4个发育阶段干旱危险性进行评价和比较,对四川盆区水稻干旱灾害承灾体易损性、成灾环境敏感性和防灾减灾能力进行分析,从而构建四川盆区水稻干旱风险评价模型,并对评价结果进行区划.结果表明: 四川盆区水稻旱灾风险整体较高,两种播栽方式下均为中等风险区分布面积最广;两种播栽方式下干旱风险空间分布特征总体一致,表现为中东部高、西南部低,从东向西、从中部向周围递减的趋势.两种播栽方式下,水稻干旱危险性差异最大的时期出现在播种-拔节阶段,直播水稻在播种-拔节阶段的干旱危险性明显低于移栽水稻,且分布范围也较移栽水稻小;直播水稻干旱灾害的轻-低风险区分布较移栽水稻广,高风险区分布面积较移栽水稻略小.

Abstract: The quantitative evaluation and comparison of drought risks at each development stage and the whole growth period between transplanting rice and direct-sowing rice in Sichuan Basin can provide a scientific basis for the transformation and promotion of rice production technology in various regions. Based on the theory of natural disaster risk and the formation mechanism of rice drought risk, we evaluated and compared the drought risk in the whole growth period and the four development stages (sowing-jointing, jointing-booting, booting-full heading, full heading-maturity) between transplanting rice and direct-sowing rice, analyzed the vulnerability of disaster bodies, the sensitivity of disaster environment and the capacity of drought disaster prevention and reduction of rice drought in Sichuan Basin, using meteorological data in Sichuan Basin from 1961 to 2017, the observation data of rise production, agricultural statistics and the basic geographical information. The drought risk assessment model for Sichuan Basin was established, which was used to classify the results of evaluation. The results indicated that the drought risk of rice in Sichuan Basin was higher. The medium-risk areas in terms of the two planting methods were both the most widely distributed areas. The spatial-distribution characteristics of drought risk for the two kinds of rice were generally the same which was high in the middle and east of the basin, low in the southwest of the basin, and decreased from east to west and from the center to the surroundings. For the two planting methods, the greatest difference of rice drought risk appeared at the sowing-jointing stage. The drought risk of the direct-sowing rice at the sowing-jointing stage was significantly lower, and the distribution range was smaller than that of the transplanting rice. The distribution of the slight-low drought risk area of the direct-sowing rice was wider, but the high-risk area was slightly smaller.