水稻发育期模型的比较.pdfVIP

中国水韬科学(Chin] Rice Sci) , 2010 , 24(3) , 303-308 http.;/ 目)1 ， 10. 3969/j. issn. 1001唰7216.2010.03.014 303 水稻发育期模型的比较 石森林l 冯慧慧1.2 金之庆1 .:E 华3 (1 江苏省农业科学院农业资源与环境研究所，江苏南京 210014 ， 2 安徽农业大学资源与环榄学院.安徽合肥 230036 川广东省气候中心，广 东广州 510080) Comparison of Phasic Development Models in Rice 1 1 3 SHl Chun-lin • FENG Hui斗mj! .2. JIN Zhi呵ing • WANG H ua (1 Institute of Agricultural Resources and Environment. ]iangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Nanjing 210014. China; 2College 01 Resources and Environment. Anhuí Agrícultural Unilll!rsity. Hefei 230036. China I 3Guangdong Climate Center. Guangzhou 510080. Chína) SHI Chunlin. FENG Huihui , JIN Zhiqing , et al. Comparison of phasic development models in rice. Chin J Rice Sci , 2010. 24 (3): 303剿308. Abstract , The difference in response patterns of development rate to temperature and daylength. the phase division and parameter setting. and the relationship among accumulated growth degree day(GDD). development rate(DVR) and develop- ment physiological day number(DPD) were discussed by comparing the phasic development models from CERE5-rice. ORY- ZA2000. RCSODS and RiceGrow. The four models showed a similar response pattern of development rate to temperature. 丁he parameter setting În CE民E5- rÎce. ORYZA2000 and RiceGrow was same in basic vegetative phase and grain filling phase. although diffcrent parameters were u8ed in these models. 8uch as GDD. DVR. and DPD. During photoperiod闹sensitive phase. three parameters. 8uch as development rate. crÎtÎcal daylength and daylength effect factor were used in these models. but one parameter was fixed În CERE分rice and 议iceGrow. One new parameter was applied in ORYZA2000 to describe