AMSR-E土壤水分产品评价及在干旱监测中的应用

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2021.03.07

干旱区研究 ›› 2021, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (3): 650-664.doi: 10.13866/j.azr.2021.03.07

AMSR-E土壤水分产品评价及在干旱监测中的应用

王静¹(),方锋²(),黄鹏程²,岳平¹,李江萍³,王大为²

1.中国气象局兰州干旱气象研究所甘肃省干旱气候变化与减灾重点实验室中国气象局干旱气候变化与减灾重点开放实验室,甘肃兰州730020
2.兰州区域气候中心,甘肃兰州730020
3.兰州大学大气科学学院,甘肃兰州730020

收稿日期:2020-04-20 修回日期:2021-03-24 出版日期:2021-05-15 发布日期:2021-06-17
通讯作者: 方锋
作者简介:王静（1978-）,女,副研究员,研究方向为气象灾害风险评估. E-mail: wangjing1102@126.com
基金资助:
中国气象局兰州干旱气象研究所创新团队建设项目(GHSCXTD-2020-3);甘肃省自然科学基金项目(20JR10RA454);甘肃省气象局气象科研项目(GSMArc2019-06);国家自然基金青年基金项目(41101422)

Evaluation of Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer for EOS(AMSR-E) soil moisture products over China and its application in drought monitoring

WANG Jing¹(),FANG Feng²(),HUANG Pengcheng²,YUE Ping¹,LI Jiangping³,WANG Dawei²

1. Lanzhou Institute of Arid Meteorology, China Meteorological Administration, Key Laboratory of Arid Climatic Change and Reducing Disaster of Gansu Province, Key Open Laboratory of Arid Climate Change and Disaster Reduction of China Meteorological Administration, Lanzhou 730020, Gansu, China
2. Lanzhou Regional Climate Center, Lanzhou 730020, Gansu, China
3. College of Atmospheric Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730020, Gansu, China

Received:2020-04-20 Revised:2021-03-24 Online:2021-05-15 Published:2021-06-17
Contact: Feng FANG

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

土壤水分在地表能量交换和气候变化中有重要作用。干旱为常见的自然灾害,土壤水分是反映干旱最直观的指标,利用微波遥感监测地表土壤水分具有明显优势,微波土壤水分产品也在干旱监测中具有重要作用,但由于地表下垫面的差异和反演算法的精度,使土壤水分产品的应用受到了限制,因此,本研究对广泛使用的AMSR-E （Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer-Earth Observing System）土壤水分产品在中国范围内的精度及在干旱监测中的作用进行评价。结果表明:AMSR-E能较好的反映站点不同深度的土壤水分情况,大多数站点存在极显著相关关系,但20 cm相关性低于10 cm,且高相关系数区域明显缩小;下垫面为白地的农试站观测的土壤水分和AMSR-E土壤水分产品之间的相关性显著高于种植作物下的农田区这2种数据的相关性;对于大多数下垫面类型,站点土壤水分和AMSR-E土壤水分之间存在明显的正相关关系,且达到极显著相关,对10 cm土壤水分观测,相关性最好的是种植高梁下观测的土壤水分,相关性达到了0.579,对20 cm土壤水分观测,相关性最好的是棉花下观测的土壤水分,相关性达到0.528。春季、夏季和秋季的相关性较高,而冬季相关性略低;在种植作物的情况下,东北、华南和西北地区,站点和AMSR-E土壤水分观测相关性较好,仅考虑白地的情况下,西北、西南和华中区域,这2种数据的相关性更高些;AMSR-E较农试站土壤水分取值范围宽,但不同区域AMSR-E土壤水分取值峰值不同,华北区域2种土壤水分观测分布和波动较为一致;AMSR-E基本能反映北方干旱和南方多雨引起的土壤水分差异趋势;大多数站点和大多数作物类型下,10 cm站点土壤水分和AMSR-E土壤水分相关性较好的情况下,20 cm也会有这样的表现。其次,AMSR-E土壤水分产品提取的土壤水分距平百分率与同期的降水距平百分率之间的相关性较好,尤其在西北地区和北方大部分区域更明显,AMSR-E土壤水分产品能较好的反映降水的波动和干旱的发生状况。

关键词: AMSR-E土壤水分产品, 土壤水分, 降水距平指数, 作物类型

Abstract:

Soil moisture plays an important role in surface energy exchange and climate change. Drought is a common natural disaster and soil moisture is the most intuitive index to reflect drought, therefore the use of microwave remote sensing to monitor surface soil moisture has obvious advantages. Microwave soil moisture products also play an important role in drought monitoring, but because of the difference of underlying surface and the accuracy of inversion algorithm, the application of soil moisture products is limited. Thus this study evaluated the accuracy of widely used AMSR-E (Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer for EOS) soil moisture products in china and their role in drought monitoring. The results showed that AMSR-E can better reflect the soil moisture at different depths, most of the sites have a very significant correlation, but the correlation of 20 cm is lower than 10 cm, and the high correlation coefficient area is significantly reduced; The correlation at bare soil between AMSR-E and agricultural meteorological station is significantly higher than that of farmland. For most crop regions, there are obvious relationships of soil moisture between agricultural meteorological station and AMSR-E. For 10 cm depth, the best correlation was observed under the planting sorghum with a coefficient of 0.579, while for 20 cm depth, the best correlation was under cotton with a coefficient of 0.528. The correlation of spring, summer and autumn was higher, but the correlation in winter was slightly lower. In the case of planting crops, the correlations of soil moisture between station and AMSR-E are better in Northeast, South and Northwest China, while in the case of white land those in Northwest, Southwest and Central China are higher; AMSR-E has a wider range of soil moisture values than the agricultural test station, but the peak values of AMSR-E are different in different regions, and the distribution and fluctuation of the two kinds of soil moisture in North China are relatively consistent; AMSR-E can basically reflect the trend of soil moisture difference caused by drought in the north and rainy in the south; For most stations and most crop types, if the correlation of 10 cm between agricultural meteorological station and AMSR-E is good, that of 20 cm soil moisture will also have this performance. Secondly, there is a good correlation between AMSR-E soil moisture anomaly percentage extracted by AMSR-E and precipitation anomaly percentage, especially in the northwest and most areas of northern China. AMSR-E soil moisture products can better reflect the fluctuation of precipitation and the occurrence of drought.

Key words: AMSR-E soil moisture, soil moisture, precipitation anomaly index, crop types

王静,方锋,黄鹏程,岳平,李江萍,王大为. AMSR-E土壤水分产品评价及在干旱监测中的应用[J]. 干旱区研究, 2021, 38(3): 650-664.

WANG Jing,FANG Feng,HUANG Pengcheng,YUE Ping,LI Jiangping,WANG Dawei. Evaluation of Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer for EOS(AMSR-E) soil moisture products over China and its application in drought monitoring[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2021, 38(3): 650-664.

图/表 15

图1

图2

表1

表2

图3

图4

表3

表4

图5

图6

表5

表6

图7

图8

表7

参考文献 31

[1]	Mccoll K A, Alemohammad S H, Akbar R, et al. The global distribution and dynamics of surface soil moisture[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2017,10(2):100-104. doi: 10.1038/ngeo2868
[2]	Chen Y Y, Yang K, Qin J, et al. Evaluation of AMSR-E retrievals and GLDAS simulations against observations of a soil moisture network on the central Tibetan Plateau[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2013,118(10):4466-4475. doi: 10.1002/jgrd.50301
[3]	Engman E T. Hydrologic research before and after Agristars[J]. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience & Remote Sensing, 1986, GE-24(1):5-11.
[4]	Sahoo A K, Houser P R, Ferguson C, et al. Evaluation of AMSR-E soil moisture results using the in-situ data over the little river experimental watershed, georgia[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2008,112:3142-3152. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2008.03.007
[5]	Gruhier C, Rosnay P D, Kerr Y, et al. Evaluation of AMSR-E soil moisture product based on ground measurements over temperate and semi-arid regions[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2008,35(10):L10405.
[6]	Draper C S, Walker J P, Steinle P J, et al. An evaluation of AMSR-E derived soil moisture over Australia[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2009,113(4):703-710. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2008.11.011
[7]	Rüdiger C, Calvet J C, Gruhier C, et al. An intercomparison of ERS-Scat and AMSR-E soil moisture observations with model simulations over france[J]. Journal of Hydrometeorology, 2009,10(2):431-447. doi: 10.1175/2008JHM997.1
[8]	Choi M. Evaluation of multiple surface soil moisture for Korean regional flux monitoring network sites: Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer E, land surface model, and ground measurements[J]. Hydrological Processes, 2012,26:597-603. doi: 10.1002/hyp.v26.4
[9]	Jackson T J, Cosh M H, Bindlish R. Validation of Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer soil moisture products[J]. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2010,48(12):4256– 4272. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2010.2051035
[10]	Chaurasia S, Tung D T, Thapliyal P K, et al. Assessment of the AMSR-E soil moisture product over India[J]. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 2011,32(23):7955-7970. doi: 10.1080/01431161.2010.531782
[11]	Brocca L, Hasenauer S, Lacava T, et al. Soil moisture estimation through ASCAT and AMSR-E sensors: An intercomparison and validation study across Europe[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2011,115:3390-3408 doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2011.08.003
[12]	Lei F N, Crow W T, Shen H F, et al. The impact of local acquisition time on the accuracy of microwave surface soil moisture retrievals over the contiguous United States[J]. Remote Sensing, 2015,7:13448-13465. doi: 10.3390/rs71013448
[13]	Kolassa J, Gentine P, Prigent C, et al. Soil moisture retrieval from AMSR-E and ASCAT microwave observation synergy. Part 2: Product evaluation[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2017,195:202-217. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2017.04.020
[14]	陈洁. AMSR-E土壤湿度产品在我国西北部地区的精度验证[D]. 北京: 中国气象科学研究院, 2010.
	[ Chen Jie. Validation of AMSR-E Soil Moisture Products in the Northwest of China[D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences, 2010. ]
[15]	Zhang A Z, Jia G S, Wang H S, et al. Evaluation of AMSR-E: Derived soil moisture over northern China[J]. Atmospheric and Oceanic Science Letters, 2011,4(4):223-228. doi: 10.1080/16742834.2011.11446933
[16]	Wu S L, Chen J. Validation of AMSR-E soil moisture products in Xilinhot grassland. Proceedings of Spie the International Society for Optical Engineering, 2012,8531: 85311J-85311J-7.
[17]	Qiu J X, Mo X G, Liu S X, et al. Intercomparison of microwave remote-sensing soil moisture data sets based on distributed eco-hydrological model simulation and in situ measurements over the North China Plain[J]. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 2013,34(19):6587-6610. doi: 10.1080/01431161.2013.788799
[18]	Wigneron J P, Kerr Y, Waldteufel P, et al. L-band Microwave Emission of the Biosphere (L-MEB) Model: Description and calibration against experimental data sets over crop fields[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2007,107(4):639-655. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2006.10.014
[19]	Zeng J Y, Li Z, Chen Q, et al. Evaluation of remotely sensed and reanalysis soil moisture products over the Tibetan Plateau using in-situ observations[J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2015,163:91-110. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2015.03.008
[20]	Su Z, Wen J, Dente L, et al. The Tibetan Plateau observatory of plateau scale soil moisture and soil temperature (Tibet-Obs) for quantifying uncertainties in coarse resolution satellite and model products[J]. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 2011,15(7):2303-2316. doi: 10.5194/hess-15-2303-2011
[21]	Zhang Q, Fan K K, Singh V P, et al. Evaluation of remotely sensed and reanalysis soil moisture against in situ observations on the Himalayan-Tibetan plateau[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 2018,123:7132-7148. doi: 10.1029/2017JD027763
[22]	Zhang T T, Gebremichael M, Koppa A, et al. An evaluation of soil moisture from AMSR-E over source area of the Yellow River, China[J]. Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 2019,11(6):461-469.
[23]	席家驹, 文军, 田辉, 等. AMSR-E遥感土壤湿度产品在青藏高原地区的适用性[J]. 农业工程学报, 2014,30(13):194-202.
	[ Xi Jiaju, Wen Jun, Tian Hui, et al. Applicability evaluation of AMSR-E remote sensing soil moisture products in Qinghai-Tibet plateau[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2014,30(13):194-202. ]
[24]	李哲, 王磊, 王林 , 等. 基于AMSR-E反演青藏高原夏季表层土壤湿度[J]. 高原气象, 2017,36(1):67-78.
	[ Li Zhe, Wang Lei, Wang Lin, et al. Top-layer soil moisture retrieval over the Qinghai-xizang Plateau in summer based on AMSR-E data[J]. Plateau Meteorology, 2017,36(1):67-78. ]
[25]	李昂, 陆其峰, 杨晓峰, 等. AMSR-E卫星反演土壤湿度与ECWMFNECP再分析土壤湿度比较分析[J]. 遥感技术与应用, 2013,28(4):666-673.
	[ Li Ang, Lu Qifeng, Yang Xiaofeng, et al. AMSR-E soil moisture compared with ECWMF and NECP soil moisture[J]. Remote Sensing Technology and Application, 2013,28(4):666-673. ]
[26]	孙博, 钱静, 陈曦, 等. 常见遥感干旱监测指标在哈萨克斯坦的一致性分析[J]. 干旱区研究, 2020,37(3):126-133.
	[ Sun Bo, Qian Jing, Chen Xi, et al. Consistency and comparison among remote sensing drought indices and SMAP soil moisture in Kazakhstan[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2020,37(3):126-133. ]
[27]	FAO, IIASA, ISRIC, et al. Harmonized World Soil Database (version 1. 1)[R]. FAO, Rome, Italy and IIASA,Laxenburg,Austria, 2009.
[28]	Dorigo W A, Wagner W, Hohensinn R, et al. The international soil moisture network: A data hosting facility for global in situ soil moisture measurements[J]. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 2011,15(5):1675-1698.
[29]	中华人民共和国国家标准GB/T 20481-2006. 气象干旱等级[M]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2018.
	[ National Standards of the People’s Republic of China,GB/T 20481-2006. Grades of Meteorological Drought[M]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2018. ]
[30]	刘广岳, 谢昌卫, 杨淑华. 青藏公路沿线多年冻土区活动层起始冻融时间的时空变化特征和影响因素[J]. 冰川冻土, 2018,40(6):1067-1078.
	[ Liu Guangyue, Xie Changwei, Yang Shuhua. Spatial and temporal variation characteristics on the onset dates of freezing and thawing of active layer and its influence factors in permafrost regions along the Qinghai Tibet highway[J]. Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 2018,40(6):1067-1078. ]
[31]	魏宝成, 银山, 贾旭, 等. 蒙古高原植物生长期土壤水分时空变化特征[J]. 干旱区研究, 2016,33(3):467-475.
	[ Wei Baocheng, Yin Shan, Jia Xu, et al. Spatiotemporal variation of soil moisture content in the Mongolia Plateau in plant growing season[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2016,33(3):467-475. ]

	一季稻	元麦	麻类	冬小麦	向日葵	夏玉米	大豆	大麦	套玉米	宿根蔗	马铃薯
样本量	1401	3	103	26945	54	6577	3690	21	798	628	2085
相关系数	0.193^**	-0.167	0.456^**	0.224^**	-0.248	0.295^**	0.247^**	0.209	0.249^**	-0.138^**	0.492^**
	新植蔗	早稻	春小麦	春玉米	晚稻	普通棉	棉花	油菜	烟草	牧草	高粱
样本量	229	407	4722	11683	361	5523	116	2395	166	4414	312
相关系数	0.086	0.200^**	0.191^**	0.328^**	0.334^**	0.363^**	0.559^**	0.302^**	0.315^**	0.523^**	0.579^**
	甘蔗	甘薯	甜菜	白地	芝麻	花生	莜麦	谷子	长绒棉	青稞	其他作物
样本量	25	848	334	37808	38	759	57	760	5	523	4470
相关系数	0.322	0.300^**	-0.161^**	0.444^**	0.299	0.171^**	0.305^**	0.391^**	-0.352	0.235^**	0.260^**

	春季	夏季	秋季	冬季
样本量	12193	9032	13800	2783
相关系数	0.462^**	0.431^**	0.440^**	0.305^**

	一季稻	元麦	麻类	冬小麦	向日葵	夏玉米	大豆	大麦	套玉米	宿根蔗	马铃薯
样本量	1374	3	103	26715	54	6538	3690	18	787	627	2054
相关系数	0.151^**	-0.305	0.384^**	0.245^**	-0.338^*	0.298^**	0.233^**	0.042	0.261^**	-0.185^**	0.502^**
	新植蔗	早稻	春小麦	春玉米	晚稻	普通棉	棉花	油菜	烟草	牧草	高粱
样本量	228	332	4690	11643	364	5476	114	2386	165	4399	309
相关系数	0.066	0.170^**	0.147^**	0.314^**	0.129^*	0.332^**	0.528^**	0.287^**	0.384^**	0.513^**	0.513^**
	甘蔗	甘薯	甜菜	白地	芝麻	花生	莜麦	谷子	长绒棉	青稞	其他作物
样本量	25	844	334	37560	38	765	57	761	5	522	4434
相关系数	0.462^**	0.280^**	0.107	0.433^**	0.204	0.145^**	0.251	0.374^**	-0.348	0.153^**	0.234^**

		东北	华北	华东	华南	华中	西北	西南
多种作物类型	样本量	15755	36325	10512	12347	2860	28781	11982
多种作物类型	相关系数	0.289^**	0.207^**	0.065^**	0.289^**	0.128^**	0.280^**	0.180^**
白地	样本量	7319	14609	1805	766	2862	8082	2365
白地	相关系数	0.307^**	0.255^**	0.317^**	0.163^**	0.337^**	0.449^**	0.354^**

		全国	东北	华北	华东	华中	华南	西南	西北
多种作物类型	相关系数	0.863^**	0.838^**	0.849^**	0.899^**	0.930^**	0.692^**	0.732^**	0.924^**
多种作物类型	样本数	629	80	180	64	70	23	75	134
白地	相关系数	0.738^**	0.863^**	0.606^**	0.906^**	0.910^**	0.828^**	0.377^*	0.849^**
白地	样本数	476	75	153	43	45	16	35	106

AMSR-E土壤水分产品评价及在干旱监测中的应用

Evaluation of Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer for EOS(AMSR-E) soil moisture products over China and its application in drought monitoring

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 15

参考文献 31

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

	一季稻	其他作物	冬小麦	向日葵	夏玉米	大豆	套玉米	宿根蔗	新植蔗	早稻
相关系数	0.768^**	0.668^**	0.716^**	0.356	0.884^**	0.727^**	0.939^**	0.928^*	0.991^**	0.046
样本数	46	66	248	4	128	65	16	5	4	15
	春小麦	春玉米	晚稻	普通棉	棉花	油菜	烟草	牧草	甘蔗	甘薯
相关系数	0.891^**	0.917^**	0.694^**	0.974^**	0.949^**	0.736^**	0.149	0.919^**	0.989^**	-0.005
样本数	70	164	30	64	29	56	6	44	5	18
	甜菜	芝麻	花生	谷子	青稞	马铃薯	高粱	麻类
相关系数	-0.919	0.997^**	0.961^**	0.897^**	0.972^**	0.870^**	0.966^**	0.760
样本数	4	3	25	14	7	41	11	6

站点	同AMSR-E土壤水分相关性		同农试站观测土壤水分相关性			站点	同AMSR-E土壤水分相关性		同农试站观测土壤水分相关性
站点	相关系数	样本量	相关系数	样本量	地表作物类型	站点	相关系数	样本量	相关系数	样本量	地表作物类型
敦煌	0.002	241	0.266	16	白地、普通棉	岷县	-0.058	260	0.811^**	33	马铃薯、其他作物、白地
永昌	-0.034	204	0.614^*	16	白地、大麦	文县北	-0.006	302	0.609^**	52	冬小麦、夏玉米、白地
凉州东	0.077	216	0.614^**	25	白地、春小麦、套玉米	武山	0.149^*	269	0.870^**	19	冬小麦、白地
景泰	0.071	251	0.929^**	20	白地	成县东	0.229^**	325	0.665^**	39	冬小麦、春玉米、白地
会宁	0.167^**	243	0.745^**	19	白地、春小麦	两当	0.250^**	328
崆峒	0.079	259	0.450^**	33	冬小麦、春玉米、白地	敦煌东	0.223^*	85
泾川	0.090	265	0.751^**	29	冬小麦、高粱、白地	安定西	0.184^**	258
宁县	-0.039	256	0.948^**	17	冬小麦、白地	秦安	0.148^*	258
玛曲	-0.131	211	0.775^**	20	白地、牧草	张家川	0.084	278
合作	-0.141^*	217	0.751^**	31	牧草、青稞	成县西	0.242^**	328

[1]	杨紫唯,车子涵,刘芙梅,陈克龙. 降水梯度对青海湖河源湿地温室气体排放日变化的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(3): 754-766.
[2]	周彦莉,吴海梅,周彦栋,尚旭民,逄蕾. 短期秸秆不同还田方式对土壤结构和水分影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(2): 502-509.
[3]	汪海娇,田丽慧,张登山,王俏雨. 青海湖东沙地不同植被恢复措施下土壤水分变化特征[J]. 干旱区研究, 2021, 38(1): 76-86.
[4]	吴芹芹, 莫淑红, 程圣东, 李鹏, 李占斌. 黄土区冻融期不同土地利用土壤水分与温度的关系[J]. 干旱区研究, 2020, 37(3): 627-.
[5]	陈新均 , 王学全, 卢琦 , 杨文斌, 张立恒, 李永华. 季节性河道土壤水分及其渗漏特征初探[J]. 干旱区研究, 2020, 37(1): 97-104.
[6]	张晓梅, 邸利, 史再军, 费俊娥, 王正安. 甘肃泾川中沟小流域不同坡位刺槐人工林土壤水分特征 [J]. 干旱区研究, 2019, 36(5): 1300-1308.
[7]	李艳萍, 史利江, 徐满厚, 李文刚. 短期增温下青藏高原多年冻土区植物生长季土壤水分的动态变化[J]. 干旱区研究, 2019, 36(3): 537-545.
[8]	宋双双，孙保平，张建锋，武毅. 保水剂与微生物菌剂对土壤水分、养分的影响[J]. 干旱区研究, 2018, 35(4): 761-769.
[9]	李小英，段争虎，陈小红，谭明亮. 黄土高原西部人工灌木林土壤水分分布规律[J]. 干旱区研究, 2014, 31(1): 38-43.
[10]	蒋德明，张娜，阿拉木萨，周全来，王永翠，苗仁辉，押田敏雄. 科尔沁沙地人工固沙植被优化配置模式试验研究[J]. 干旱区研究, 2014, 31(1): 149-156.
[11]	张恒, 蒋进, 宋春武, 李兴, 姜有为. 防护林沙拐枣人工平茬更新复壮效果分析[J]. 干旱区研究, 2013, 30(5): 850-855.
[12]	杨轩, 谭广洋, 沈禹颖. 秸秆还田对旱作冬小麦后茬土壤水分的影响及其APSIM模拟[J]. 干旱区研究, 2013, 30(4): 609-614.
[13]	王海燕, 刘廷玺, 王力, 吴尧, 王天帅, 童新. 科尔沁沙地坨甸交错区土壤水分的空间变异规律[J]. 干旱区研究, 2013, 30(3): 438-443.
[14]	苗仁辉, 蒋德明, 王永翠. 科尔沁沙质草地封育过程中的植被变化及其机制[J]. 干旱区研究, 2013, 30(2): 264-270.
[15]	王晗生. 干旱影响下人工林的天然更新进程[J]. 干旱区研究, 2012, 29(5): 743-750.