Multiresponse, multiobjective calibration as a diagnostic tool to compare accuracy and structural limitations of five coupled soil‐plant models and CLM3.5
Multiresponse, multiobjective calibration as a diagnostic tool to compare accuracy and structural limitations of five coupled soil‐plant models and CLM3.5
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/2013wr014536
复制
发表时间：
2013-12
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
T. Wöhling;S. Gayler;E. Priesack;J. Ingwersen;H. Wizemann;P. Högy;M. Cuntz;S. Attinger;V. Wulfmeyer;T. Streck
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
T. Wöhling;S. Gayler;E. Priesack;J. Ingwersen;H. Wizemann;P. Högy;M. Cuntz;S. Attinger;V. Wulfmeyer;T. Streck
在德国西南部的 Kraichgau 和 Swabian Alb 地区的两个对比田地中，对具有不同表征土壤-植物耦合系统物理过程的六个模型进行了测试，以同时再现冬小麦生长季节期间土壤含水量、蒸散量和叶面积指数的动态。该研究的主要目的是评估模型 LEACHN、SUCROS、CERES、GECROS 和 SPASS 以及地表模型 CLM3.5 的性能并识别结构缺陷。每个模型的校准都在具有三个不同目标函数的多目标框架中提出，这些目标函数总结了模型模拟与三种观测类型之间的拟合度。 AMALGAM 进化搜索算法用于同时估计最重要的土壤水力和植物参数。这六个模型在数据类型拟合之间的权衡方面表现出很大的可变性。机械过程描述，特别是根系统的描述，大大减少了 SPASS 和 GECROS 模型的权衡。这些模型充分模拟了在不受限制的土壤供水条件下衰老过程中根部吸水和蒸腾的减少。与更简单的模型相比，SPASS 模型尤其表现出更好的整体性能，这与所有模型室相互作用的结构复杂性水平足够高以及多目标优化中对加权方案的参数敏感性相对较低有关。根系形成的动态考虑尤为重要，在 SPASS 模型中对其进行了非常详细的模拟，作为不同土壤层中氮 (N) 和水分可用性的函数。事实证明，所提出的多目标校准程序对于识别对于充分模拟土壤-植物耦合系统很重要的过程非常有用。对这些过程的考虑以及我们对模型校准的不同数据类型的价值的见解预计将产生更准确、更具预测性的陆地表面模型。
Six models with differing representation of the physical process in the coupled soil‐plant system are tested to simultaneously reproduce the dynamics of soil water contents, evapotranspiration, and leaf area index during a growing season of winter wheat at two contrasting field plots in the Kraichgau and the Swabian Alb regions in South‐West Germany. The main aim of the study is the assessment of the performance and the identification of structural deficits of the models LEACHN, SUCROS, CERES, GECROS, and SPASS as well as the land‐surface model CLM3.5. The calibration of each model is posed in a multiobjective framework with three different objective functions that summarize the fit between model simulations and the three observation types. The AMALGAM evolutionary search algorithm is utilized to simultaneously estimate the most important soil hydraulic and plant parameters. The six models exhibit a wide variability in the trade‐offs between the fitting to the data types. Mechanistic process description, particularly of the root system, reduces the trade‐off considerably for the SPASS and GECROS models. These models adequately simulate the reduction of root water uptake and transpiration during senescence under nonlimited soil water supply. The SPASS model in particular shows an overall better performance as compared to the more simpler models which is related to an adequate level of structural complexity in the interplay of all model compartments combined with a relatively low parameter sensitivity to the weighting scheme in the multiobjective optimization. The dynamic consideration of the root system formation is particularly important, which is simulated quite detailed in the SPASS model as a function of nitrogen (N) and water availability in the different soil horizons. The proposed multiobjective calibration procedure proved to be very useful to identify processes that are important to adequately simulate the coupled soil‐plant system. The consideration of these processes and our insights about the value of different data types for model calibration is expected to lead to more accurate, predictive land‐surface models.