基于FLUXNET数据集对陆面模式CoLM能量通量的单点评估

郭琦; 刘少锋; 袁华; 李红梅

doi:10.3878/j.issn.1006-9585.2021.21084

基于FLUXNET数据集对陆面模式CoLM能量通量的单点评估

doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9585.2021.21084

郭琦^1,,
刘少锋^{1, 2, ,},
袁华^{1, 2},
李红梅¹

1.
中山大学大气科学学院，广东珠海 519082
2.
南方海洋科学与工程广东省实验室（珠海），广东珠海 519082

基金项目: 国家重点研发计划项目 2017YFA0604300，国家自然科学基金项目 41875128、41730962，南方海洋科学与工程广东省实验室（珠海）创新团队建设项目311021009

详细信息

作者简介:
郭琦，女，1993年出生，硕士研究生，主要从事陆面模式研究。E-mail: 505766845@qq.com

通讯作者:
刘少锋，E-mail: liushaof5@mail.sysu.edu.cn

中图分类号: P461
计量
- 文章访问数: 144
- HTML全文浏览量: 44
- PDF下载量: 14
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-05-07
- 网络出版日期: 2021-11-22
- 刊出日期: 2022-12-12

Evaluating Energy Fluxes of the Common Land Model Based on FLUXNET Dataset

Qi GUO^1
,,
Shaofeng LIU^{1, 2
, ,},
Hua YUAN^{1, 2},
Hongmei LI¹

1.
School of Atmospheric Sciences, Sun Yat-Sen University, Zhuhai, Guangdong Province 519082
2.
Southern Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory, Zhuhai, Guangdong Province 519082

Funds: National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant 2017YFA0604300), National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants 41875128 and 41730962), Innovation Group Project of Southern Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory (Zhuhai) (Grant 311021009)

摘要

摘要: 模式评估是模式发展中的重要一环。本文利用来自FLUXNET2015数据集的30个站点的涡动相关系统观测数据，重点关注能量通量，对通用陆面模式（Common Land Model version 2014，CoLM2014）在不同典型下垫面的模拟能力进行评估。结果表明，模式总体上能抓住感热、潜热和净辐射通量在日、季节和年平均等不同时间尺度上的变化特征，对感热、潜热和净辐射通量都有较好的模拟能力，净辐射的模拟效果最好，潜热通量次之。季节变化模拟中，感热、潜热通量在夏季不同植被型下站点的空间离散程度大于冬季，不同站点间模拟效果相差较大，净辐射多站点标准差变化幅度要小于感热、潜热，不同站点间模拟效果偏差较小。CoLM在常绿针叶林、稀树林地、草地、农田模拟感热、潜热通量的效果相对较好，在永久湿地、落叶阔叶林下模拟感热通量较差。本研究对CoLM2014在未来的改进和发展中提供了有用的参考。
- 模式评估 /
- FLUXNET2015数据集 /
- 能量通量 /
- CoLM2014模式
Abstract: Model evaluation is an important part of model development. In this study, the eddy covariance measurements from 30 FLUXNET sites of FLUXNET2015 dataset were used to evaluate the performance of the Common Land Model, version 2014 (CoLM2014) over different land-cover types, focusing on energy fluxes. The results show that the model captures the variation characteristics of sensible heat flux, latent heat flux, and net radiation flux at different time scales, such as the daily, seasonal, and annual averages, and has a good simulation ability for these fluxes. The simulation effect of net radiation is the best, followed by that of latent heat flux. When simulating seasonal variation, the spatial dispersion degree of sensible and latent heat fluxes under different vegetation types is greater in summer than in winter, and the simulation effect varies greatly among different stations. The variation range of net radiation standard deviation is smaller than sensible and latent heat fluxes, and the deviation of the simulation effect between different stations is small. The evaluation performances for evergreen needleleaf forests, savannas, grasslands, and croplands were relatively good, but poor performances were obtained when simulating the sensible heat flux in wetlands and deciduous broadleaf forests. This study provides a useful reference for improving and developing CoLM2014.
- Model evaluation /
- FLUXNET2015 dataset /
- energy fluxes /
- CoLM2014 model

HTML全文

图 1 基于USGS分类的站点分布

Figure 1. Distribution of sites on the USGS classification

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 不同地表覆盖类型（a）感热通量、（b）潜热通量、（c）净辐射的年平均模拟与观测对比。EBF表示常绿阔叶林，OSH表示稀疏灌木林，DBF表示落叶阔叶林，WSA表示有林草地，WET表示永久湿地，MF表示混交林，SAV表示稀树林地，CRO表示农田，GRA表示草地，ENF表示常绿针叶林

Figure 2. Comparison of annual mean sensible heat flux, latent heat flux, and net radiation in different land cover types between simulation and observation. EBF: evergreen broadleaf forest, OSH: open shrubland, DBF: deciduous broadleaf forest, WSA: woody savanna, WET: wetland, MF: mixed forest, SAV: savanna, CRO: cropland, GRA: grassland, ENF: evergreen needleleaf forest

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 不同地表覆盖类型感热通量模拟值与观测值的多年平均季节变化和多站点的标准偏差季节变化（柱状图）：（a）EBF；（b）OSH；（c）DBF；（d）WSA；（e）WET；（f）MF；（g）SAV；（h）CRO；（i）GRA；（j）ENF。地表覆盖类型后面括号内的数字表示为对应植被类型的FLUXNET站点个数

Figure 3. Multi-annual averaged seasonal variations in the simulated and observed sensible heat flux in different land cover types and the corresponding standard deviation across sites (bar chart): (a) EBF: evergreen broadleaf forest; (b) OSH: open shrubland; (c) DBF: deciduous broadleaf forest; (d) WSA: woody savanna; (e) WET: wetland; (f) MF: mixed forest; (g) SAV: savanna; (h) CRO: cropland; (i) GRA: grassland; (j) ENF: evergreen needleleaf forest. The numbers inside brackets following the land-cover types represent the number of FLUXNET sites selected for the corresponding vegetation type

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 不同地表覆盖类型多年月平均感热通量的多站点模拟与观测对比散点图：（a）EBF；（b）OSH；（c）DBF；（d）WSA；（e）WET；（f）MF；（g）SAV；（h）CRO；（i）GRA；（j）ENF

Figure 4. Scatter plots of monthly sensible heat flux between simulation and observation for sites in different land cover types: (a) EBF; (b) OSH; (c) DBF; (d) WSA; (e) WET; (f) MF; (g) SAV; (h) CRO; (i) GRA; (j) ENF

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 同图3，但为潜热通量

Figure 5. Same as Fig. 3, but for latent heat flux

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 同图4，但为潜热通量

Figure 6. Same as Fig. 4, but for latent heat flux

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 同图4，但为净辐射

Figure 8. Same as Fig. 4, but for net radiation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 同图3，但为净辐射

Figure 7. Same as Fig. 3, but for net radiation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 不同地表覆盖类型感热通量模拟值与观测值的多年平均日变化对比：（a）EBF；（b）OSH；（c）DBF；（d）WSA；（e）WET；（f）MF；（g）SAV；（h）CRO；（i）GRA；（j）ENF

Figure 9. Comparison between the observed and simulated sensible heat flux on a diurnal course in different land cover types (monthly average over many years): (a) EBF; (b) OSH; (c) DBF; (d) WSA; (e) WET; (f) MF; (g) SAV; (h) CRO; (i) GRA; (j) ENF

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 不同地表覆盖类型感热通量的多年平均日变化在不同季节春季（MAM）、夏季（JJA）、秋季（SON）、冬季（DJF）的模拟偏差（模拟减观测）：（a）EBF；（b）OSH；（c）DBF；（d）WSA；（e）WET：（f）MF；（g）SAV；（h）CRO；（i）GRA；（j）ENF

Figure 10. Bias (simulation minus observation) of the simulated multi-annual average diurnal variation of sensible heat flux in different land cover types in spring (March–April–May, MAM), summer (June–July–August, JJA), autumn (September–October–November, SON), and winter (December–January–February, DJF): (a) EBF; (b) OSH; (c) DBF; (d) WSA; (e) WET; (f) MF; (g) SAV; (h) CRO; (i) GRA; (j) ENF

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 同图9，但为潜热通量

Figure 11. Same as Fig. 9, but for latent heat flux

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 同图10，但为潜热通量

Figure 12. Same as Fig. 10, but for latent heat flux

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 同图9，但为净辐射

Figure 13. Same as Fig. 9, but for net radiation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 14 同图10，但为净辐射

Figure 14. Same as Fig. 10, but for net radiation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 15 CoLM对10种地表覆盖类型（1：CRO；2：DBF；3：ENF；4：WET；5：GRA；6：MF；7：SAV；8：EBF；9：WSA；10：OSH）的（a）感热通量、（b）潜热通量、（c）净辐射在不同时间尺度（半小时、月、年）上的模拟能力对比泰勒图

Figure 15. Taylor diagrams of the CoLM performance for (a) sensible heat flux, (b) latent heat flux, and (c) net radiation, based on time scales of stepwise, monthly, and yearly in different land cover types (1: CRO; 2: DBF; 3: ENF; 4: WET; 5: GRA; 6: MF; 7: SAV; 8: EBF; 9: WSA; 10: OSH)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 16 CoLM在10种地表覆盖类型模拟的感热通量（H）、潜热通量（LE）、净辐射（Rnet）在不同时间尺度（半小时、月、年）的（a）RMSE和（b）MAE

Figure 16. Performance of the CoLM in simulating sensible heat flux (H), latent heat flux (LE), and net radiation (Rnet) on time scales of stepwise, monthly, and yearly measured using the RMSE and MAE (W/m²) calculated in different land cover types

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 FLUXNET站点信息

Table 1. FLUXNET site information

站点	气候型	气候带	降水量/ mm a⁻¹	平均温度/°C	纬度	经度	观测年	地表覆盖类型（USGS）
AU-Tum	Cfb	温带海洋性气候	1159	10.7	35.7°S	148.2°E	2002～2005年	常绿阔叶林
AU-How	Aw	冬干型热带草原气候	1449	27.0	12.5°S	131.2°E	2003～2005年	稀树林地
BE-Lon	Cfb	温带海洋性气候	800	10	50.6°N	4.7°E	2004～2007年	农田
BE-Bra	Cfb	温带海洋性气候	750	9.8	51.3°N	4.5°E	2000～2002年	混交林
BW-Mal	BSh	热带半干旱气候	493	22.4	19.9°S	23.6°E	1999～2001年	稀树林地
CA-Mer	Dfb	温夏型湿润气候	891	6.1	45.4°N	75.5°W	2000～2005年	湿地
CA-Qfo	Dfc	亚寒带湿润气候	962.32	−0.36	49.7°N	74.3°W	2003～2005年	常绿针叶林
CA-SF3	Dfc	亚寒带湿润气候	470	0.4	54.1°N	106.0°W	2003～2005年	稀疏灌木林
CA-NS2	Dfc	亚寒带湿润气候	499.82	−2.88	55.9°N	98.5°W	2002～2005年	常绿针叶林
CA-NS1	Dfc	亚寒带湿润气候	500.29	−2.89	55.8°N	98.4°W	2002～2005年	常绿针叶林
CA-Man	Dfc	亚寒带湿润气候	520	−3.2	55.9°N	98.5°W	2000～2003年	常绿针叶林
DE-Tha	Cfb	温带海洋性气候	643	8.1	51.0°N	13.6°E	1998～2005年	常绿针叶林
DE-Geb	Cfb	温带海洋性气候	470	8.5	51.1°N	10.9°E	2004～2005年	农田
ES-LMa	Csa	热夏型地中海气候	370	16.5	39.9°N	5.8°W	2004～2005年	稀树林地
FI-Hyy	Dfc	亚寒带湿润气候	620	2.2	61.8°N	24.3°E	2001～2004年	常绿针叶林
FI-Kaa	Dfc	亚寒带湿润气候	454	−1.4	69.1°N	27.3°E	2004～2005年	湿地
IT-MBo	Cfb	亚寒带湿润气候	1214	5.1	46.0°N	11.0°E	2003～2007年	草地
IT-Amp	Cfa	温带海洋性气候	945	10.6	41.9°N	13.6°E	2003～2005年	草地
IT-Cpz	Csa	温带海洋性气候	780	15.6	41.7°N	12.4°E	2006～2008年	常绿阔叶林
IT-Lav	Cfb	温带海洋性气候	1291	7.8	45.9°N	11.3°E	2004～2007年	常绿针叶林
US-Bo1	Dfa	热夏型温带湿润气候	991	11.0	40.0°N	88.3°W	1998～2005年	农田
US-Ha1	Dfb	温夏型湿润气候	1071	11.0	40.0°N	88.3°W	1996～2002年	落叶阔叶林
US-Blo	Csa	热夏型地中海气候	1380	11.2	38.9°N	120.6°W	2000～2005年	常绿针叶林
US-FPe	BSk	凉爽半干旱气候	335	5.5	48.3°N	105.1°W	2000～2005年	草地
US-Var	Csa	热夏型地中海气候	544	15.9	38.4°N	121.0°W	2001～2005年	草地
US-Syv	Dfb	温夏型湿润气候	826	3.8	46.2°N	89.3°W	2002～2005年	混交林
US-Goo	Cfa	亚热带湿润气候	1425.77	15.89	34.3°N	89.9°W	2002～2005年	草地
US-Ton	Csa	热夏型地中海气候	559	15.8	38.4°N	120.9°W	2001～2005年	有林草地
US-ARM	Cfa	亚热带湿润气候	843	14.76	36.6°N	97.5°W	2003～2005年	农田
ZA-Kru	Cwa	亚热带季风性湿润气候	525	22.2	25.0°S	31.5°E	2002～2003年	稀树林地

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 不同地表覆盖类型感热通量的年尺度变化模拟与观测评估

Table 2. Evaluation of the annual variability of sensible heat flux in different land cover types between simulation and observation

地表覆盖类型	样本数	感热通量模拟年平均值/W m⁻²	感热通量观测年平均值/W m⁻²	绝对误差/ W m⁻²	相对误差	相关系数	均方根误差/ W m⁻²
EBF	7	39.31	51.26	−11.95	−23.30%	0.14	16.89
OSH	3	22.48	31.09	−8.61	−27.69%	0.73	8.75
DBF	6	15.97	34.10	−18.13	−53.17%	0.53	32.11
WSA	5	52.40	59.03	−6.63	−11.23%	0.75	8.29
WET	8	4.42	19.04	−14.62	−76.79%	0.30	47.78
MF	7	14.29	12.97	1.32	10.18%	0.81*	5.11
SAV	10	68.07	51.35	16.72	32.56%	0.89*	16.37
CRO	17	23.35	20.36	2.99	14.69%	0.92*	8.19
GRA	23	32.89	23.43	9.46	40.38%	0.84*	14.33
ENF	37	20.37	33.90	−13.53	−39.91%	0.83*	14.46
全部	123	28.27	31.91	−3.64	−11.40%	0.71	17.23
注：EBF表示常绿阔叶林，OSH表示稀疏灌木林，DBF表示落叶阔叶林，WSA表示有林草地，WET表示永久湿地，MF表示混交林，SAV表示稀树林地，CRO表示农田，GRA表示草地，ENF表示常绿针叶林；*表示相关系数通过0.01显著性检验；下同。

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 不同地表覆盖类型潜热通量的年尺度变化模拟与观测评估

Table 3. Evaluation of the annual variability of latent heat flux in different land cover types between simulation and observation

地表覆盖类型	样本数	潜热通量模拟年平均值/W m⁻²	潜热通量观测年平均值/W m⁻²	绝对误差/W m⁻²	相对误差	相关系数	均方根误差/ W m⁻²
EBF	7	48.33	44.47	3.86	8.70%	0.64	17.82
OSH	3	23.08	24.54	−1.45	−5.91%	0.75	2.52
DBF	6	40.10	35.89	4.21	11.73%	0.48	5.13
WSA	5	33.67	30.32	3.35	11.05%	0.68	4.37
WET	8	55.80	30.96	24.85	80.26%	−0.92	37.45
MF	7	39.22	22.30	16.92	0.76%	−0.87	22.85
SAV	10	37.35	45.50	−8.15	−17.91%	0.96*	11.45
CRO	17	42.36	39.28	3.08	7.84%	0.79*	12.21
GRA	23	39.17	34.27	4.90	14.30%	0.76*	13.03
ENF	37	34.57	31.22	3.35	10.73%	0.77*	10.44
全部	123	39.12	34.32	4.79	13.96%	0.57*	13.73

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 不同地表覆盖类型净辐射的年尺度变化模拟与观测评估

Table 4. Evaluation of the annual variability of net radiation in different land cover types between simulation and observation

地表覆盖类型	样本数	净辐射模拟年平均值/W m⁻²	净辐射观测年平均值/W m⁻²	绝对误差/W m⁻²	相对误差	相关系数	均方根误差/ W m⁻²
EBF	7	90.31	88.21	2.10	2.38%	0.79*	6.81
OSH	3	24.54	51.01	−26.47	−51.89%	0.42	4.92
DBF	6	43.75	76.10	−32.35	−42.51%	0.53	32.99
WSA	5	86.43	95.51	−9.09	−9.52%	0.34	10.73
WET	8	43.92	64.27	−20.35	−31.66%	0.67	22.32
MF	7	54.58	60.94	−6.37	−10.45%	0.42	6.73
SAV	10	105.78	112.22	−6.44	−5.74%	0.95*	14.03
CRO	17	66.39	76.94	−10.54	−13.70%	0.52	20.48
GRA	23	72.54	61.44	11.10	18.07%	0.58	20.52
ENF	37	56.47	76.58	−20.11	−26.26%	0.87*	25.46
全部	123	66.22	76.08	−9.86	−12.96%	0.62*	16.50

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 不同地表覆盖类型下感热、潜热、净辐射通量的平均归一化模拟偏差

Table 5. Mean normalized simulation bias of sensible and latent heat fluxes and net radiation flux in different land cover types

	EBF(2)	OSH(1)	DBF(1)	WSA(1)	WET(2)	MF(2)	SAV(4)	CRO(4)	GRA(5)	ENF(8)
感热通量	−0.02	−0.01	−0.21	−0.03	−0.42	−0.05	0.06	0.02	0.06	0.03
潜热通量	0.01	−0.13	0.15	0.21	0.15	0.06	−0.03	−0.04	−0.05	0.04
净辐射	−0.05	−0.08	−0.02	−0.23	−0.12	0.20	−0.03	0.12	0.19	−0.08

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(31)

[1]	Baldocchi D, Falge E, Gu L H, et al. 2001. FLUXNET: A new tool to study the temporal and spatial variability of ecosystem-scale carbon dioxide, water vapor, and energy flux densities [J]. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 82(11): 2415−2434. doi:10.1175/1520-0477(2001)082<2415:FANTTS>2.3.CO;2
[2]	Bonan G B. 1996. A land surface model (LSM Version 1.0) for ecological, hydrological, and atmospheric studies: Technical description and User’s Guide [R]. NCAR Tech. Note, NCAR/TN-417+STR, 150pp.
[3]	Bonan G B. 2015. Ecological Climatology: Concepts and Applications [M]. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[4]	Collatz G J, Ball J T, Grivet C, et al. 1991. Physiological and environmental regulation of stomatal conductance, photosynthesis and transpiration: A model that includes a laminar boundary layer [J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 54(2–4): 107–136, doi: 10.1016/0168-1923(91)90002-8
[5]	Dai Y J, Dickinson R E, Wang Y P. 2004. A two-big-leaf model for canopy temperature, photosynthesis, and stomatal conductance [J]. J. Climate, 17(12): 2281−2299. doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017<2281:ATMFCT>2.0.CO;2
[6]	Dai Y J, Zeng Q C. 1997. A land surface model (IAP94) for climate studies part I: Formulation and validation in off-line experiments [J]. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 14(4): 433−460. doi: 10.1007/s00376-997-0063-4
[7]	Dai Y J, Zeng X B, Dickinson R E, et al. 2003. The common land model [J]. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 84(8): 1013−1024. doi: 10.1175/BAMS-84-8-1013
[8]	戴永久, 魏楠, 黄安宁, 等. 2018. 通用陆面模式(CoLM)湖泊过程方案与性能评估[J]. 科学通报, 63(28−29): 3002−3021 Dai Yongjiu, Wei Nan, Huang Anning, et al. 2018. The lake scheme of the Common Land Model and its performance evaluation [J]. Chinese Science Bulletin (in Chinese), 63(28−29): 3002−3021. doi: 10.1360/N972018-00609
[9]	Dickinson R E, Henderson-Sellers A, Kennedy P J. 1993. Biosphere-Atmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS) version 1e as coupled to the NCAR community climate model [R]. NCAR Tech. Note, NCAR/TN-387+STR, 72pp.
[10]	Groenendijk M, Dolman A J, van der Molen M K, et al. 2011. Assessing parameter variability in a photosynthesis model within and between plant functional types using global FLUXNET eddy covariance data [J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 151(1): 22−38. doi: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2010.08.013
[11]	Huang C L, Li X, Gu J. 2008. Estimation of regional soil moisture by assimilating multi-sensor passive microwave remote sensing observations based on ensemble Kalman filter [C]//2008 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium. Boston, MA: IEEE, III-1052–III-1055,doi: 10.1109/IGARSS.2008.4779534
[12]	IPCC. 2019. Summary for policymakers [M]//Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security, and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems. Shukla P R, Skea J, Calvo Buendia E, et al, Eds. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
[13]	Ji D, Wang L, Feng J, et al. 2014. Description and basic evaluation of BNU-ESM version 1 [J]. Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., 7(2): 1601−1647. doi: 10.5194/gmdd-7-1601-2014
[14]	Kiehl J T, Hack J J, Bonan G B, et al. 1996. Description of the NCAR Community Climate Model (CCM3) [R]. NCAR Tech. Note, NCAR/TN-420+STR, 112pp.
[15]	Liang X Z, Xu M, Yuan X, et al. 2012. Regional climate–weather research and forecasting model [J]. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 93(9): 1363−1387. doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00180.1
[16]	刘少锋, 林朝晖, 蒋星, 等. 2009. IAP大气-植被耦合模式的建立及其模拟 [J]. 气候与环境研究, 14(3): 258−272. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9585.2009.03.03 Liu Shaofeng, Lin Zhaohui, Jiang Xing, et al. 2009. The IAP coupled atmosphere vegetation model and its numerical simulation [J]. Climatic and Environmental Research (in Chinese), 14(3): 258−272. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9585.2009.03.03
[17]	罗斯琼, 吕世华, 张宇, 等. 2008. CoLM模式对青藏高原中部BJ站陆面过程的数值模拟 [J]. 高原气象, 27(2): 259−271. Luo Siqiong, Lü Shihua, Zhang Yu, et al. 2008. Simulation analysis on land surface process of BJ site of Central Tibetan Plateau using CoLM [J]. Plateau Meteorology (in Chinese), 27(2): 259−271.
[18]	马灵玲. 2005. 通用陆面模式CoLM估算地表蒸散[D]. 中国科学院中国遥感卫星地面站硕士学位论文. MaLingling. 2005. Estimation of Regional ET with the Common Land Model[D]. M. S. thesis (in Chinese), China Remote Sensing Satellite Ground Station, Chinese Academy of Sciences
[19]	Meng C L, Li Z L, Zhan X, et al. 2009. Land surface temperature data assimilation and its impact on evapotranspiration estimates from the Common Land Model [J]. Water Resour. Res., 45(2): W02421. doi: 10.1029/2008WR006971
[20]	Pastorello G, Trotta C, Canfora E, et al. 2020. The FLUXNET2015 dataset and the ONEFlux processing pipeline for eddy covariance data [J]. Scientific Data, 7(1): 225. doi: 10.1038/s41597-020-0534-3
[21]	彭静漫, 刘少锋, 戴永久, 等. 2020. 基于陆面模式基准平台ILAMB对陆面模式CoLM的评估 [J]. 气候与环境研究, 25(6): 649−666. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9585.2020.20021 Peng Jingman, Liu Shaofeng, Dai Yongjiu, et al. 2020. Evaluation of common land model based on international land model benchmarking system [J]. Climatic and Environmental Research (in Chinese), 25(6): 649−666. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9585.2020.20021
[22]	Shangguan W, Dai Y J, Duan Q Y, et al. 2014. A global soil data set for earth system modeling [J]. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 6(1): 249−263. doi: 10.1002/2013MS000293
[23]	宋耀明, 郭维栋, 张耀存, 等. 2009. 陆面过程模式CoLM和NCAR_CLM3.0对中国典型森林生态系统陆气相互作用的模拟Ⅰ. 不同模式模拟结果的初步分析 [J]. 气候与环境研究, 14(3): 229−242. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9585.2009.03.01 Song Yaoming, Guo Weidong, Zhang Yaocun, et al. 2009. Performances of CoLM and NCAR_CLM3.0 in simulating land-atmosphere interactions over typical forest ecosystems in China Part I. Preliminary analysis of the simulations based on different models [J]. Climatic and Environmental Research (in Chinese), 14(3): 229−242. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9585.2009.03.01
[24]	Taylor K E. 2001. Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single diagram [J]. J. Geophys. Res., 106(D7): 7183−7192. doi: 10.1029/2000JD900719
[25]	Twine T E, Kustas W P, Norman J M, et al. 2000. Correcting eddy-covariance flux underestimates over a grassland [J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 103(3): 279−300. doi: 10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00123-4
[26]	Wilson K, Goldstein A, Falge E, et al. 2002. Energy balance closure at FLUXNET sites [J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 113(1–4): 223–243,doi: 10.1016/S0168-1923(02)00109-0
[27]	Xin Q C, Zhou X W, Wei N, et al. 2020. A semiprognostic phenology model for simulating multidecadal dynamics of global vegetation leaf area index [J]. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 12(7): e2019MS001935. doi: 10.1029/2019MS001935
[28]	Yuan H, Dai Y J, Xiao Z Q, et al. 2011. Reprocessing the MODIS leaf area index products for land surface and climate Modelling [J]. Remote Sens. Environ., 115(5): 1171−1187. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2011.01.001
[29]	曾庆存, 林朝晖. 2010. 地球系统动力学模式和模拟研究的进展 [J]. 地球科学进展, 25(1): 1−6. doi: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2010.01.0001 Zeng Qingcun, Lin Zhaohui. 2010. Recent progress on the earth system dynamical model and its numerical simulations [J]. Advances in Earth Science (in Chinese), 25(1): 1−6. doi: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2010.01.0001
[30]	Zhang X X, Dai Y J, Cui H Z, et al. 2017. Evaluating common land model energy fluxes using FLUXNET data [J]. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 34(9): 1035−1046. doi: 10.1007/s00376-017-6251-y
[31]	Zhu J W, Zeng X D, Zhang M H, et al. 2018. Evaluation of the new dynamic global vegetation model in CAS-ESM [J]. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 35(6): 659−670. doi: 10.1007/s00376-017-7154-7