“衡邵娄干旱走廊”干旱时空演变特征分析

doi:10.11755/j.issn.1006-7639(2023)-04-0550

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

近年来，长江流域干旱事件频发，干旱灾害造成的损失越来越大，为进一步提升区域干旱灾害风险管理及防旱抗旱能力，开展典型旱区干旱时空演变规律研究具有重要意义。“衡邵娄干旱走廊”是湖南省干旱最严重区域，利用该区域33个气象站1971—2022年逐月降水量构建标准化降水指数（Standardized Precipitation Index，SPI）序列数据集，以邵阳县为示例，应用游程理论整合干旱事件，基于Gumbel-Copula函数构建干旱历时和强度联合分布函数，计算干旱联合重现期并推广至整个研究区域，在此基础上构建干旱等级划分标准，分析整个研究区域各等级干旱概率空间分布特征。主要结论如下：邵阳县Ⅰ型和Ⅱ型干旱历时和强度理论联合重现期峰值分别约97、27 a，表明长历时且高强度干旱事件发生概率很小，远低于长历时或高强度干旱事件发生概率，这是研究区干旱事件的共性。基于干旱历时和强度联合分布组合可有效避免单一变量在识别干旱等级时对干旱事件整体的分割，能够更准确评估干旱的复杂性及大范围影响。近52 a来，“衡邵娄干旱走廊”西部轻旱最频繁，重旱与特旱发生频率低，特旱主要分布在邵阳县、邵东县及双峰县一带。

关键词: 衡邵娄干旱走廊, SPI, 游程理论, Copula函数, 联合重现期

Abstract:

Recently, the droughts attack frequently in the Yangtze River basin, resulting in more and more loss. To further improve regional drought risk management and drought resistance capabilities, it is of great significance to conduct research on the spatio-temporal evolution characteristics of drought in typical drought-prone areas. “Heng-Shao-Lou drought corridor” in Hunan Province is a region with most severe droughts, the standardized precipitation index (SPI) dataset based on monthly precipitation data from 33 meteorological stations in this area from 1971 to 2022 is constructed. Citing the case of Shaoyang County, run theory is applied to integrate drought events, and Gumbel-Copula is adopted to construct the joint distribution function of drought duration and severity, then the joint return periods of drought are calculated and the method is extended to the whole study area. On the basis of it, the classification standard of drought grades is established, and the spatial distribution characteristics of drought probability for each level in the whole study area are analyzed. The results show that the peaks of theoretical joint return period of drought duration and severity for the type Ⅰ and type Ⅱ in Shaoyang County are around 97 a and 27 a, respectively, which indicates that the probability of drought events with long duration and high severity is very small and far lower than that of drought events with long duration or high severity, it is a common feature of drought events in research area. Furthermore, the combination of drought duration and severity joint distribution can effectively avoid segmentation of the whole drought event when drought grades are identified by a single variable, and can evaluate the complexity and large-scale impact of drought more accurately. In the past 52 years, the slight drought occurs most frequently in western region of the “Heng-Shao-Lou drought corridor”, while the frequency of severe or extreme drought is low. Extreme drought mainly distributes in Shaoyang County, Shaodong County and Shuangfeng County.

Key words: the Heng-Shao-Lou drought corridor, SPI, run theory, Copula function, joint return periods

中图分类号:

P462.3

杨扬, 赵伟明, 胡颖冰, 盛东, 魏永强, 申志高, 谭军. “衡邵娄干旱走廊”干旱时空演变特征分析[J]. 干旱气象, 2023, 41(4): 550-559.

YANG Yang, ZHAO Weiming, HU Yingbing, SHENG Dong, WEI Yongqiang, SHEN Zhigao, TAN Jun. Spatio-temporal evolution characteristics of drought in the “Heng-Shao-Lou drought corridor”[J]. Journal of Arid Meteorology, 2023, 41(4): 550-559.

图/表 12

图1 衡邵娄干旱走廊地理位置、地形高度和气象站点分布

Fig.1 The distribution of geographic location， terrain elevation and meteorological stations in the Heng-Shao-Lou drought corridor

表1 基于SPI的干旱等级划分标准

Tab.1 Classification standard of drought grades based on SPI

等级	类型	SPI
1	无旱	>-0.5
2	轻旱	（-1.0， -0.5]
3	中旱	（-1.5， -1.0]
4	重旱	（-2.0， -1.5]
5	特旱	≤-2.0

表2 1971—2022年邵阳县干旱事件统计

Tab.2 Statistics of drought events in Shaoyang County during 1971-2022

类型	SPI-1		游程理论整合
类型	发生频次	发生频率/%	发生频次	发生频率/%
无旱	399	70.8	360	76.9
轻旱	79	14.0	59	12.6
中旱	48	8.5	29	6.2
重旱	22	3.9	13	2.7
特旱	16	2.8	7	1.5

表3 1971—2022年邵阳县干旱事件历时和强度特征量统计

Tab.3 The characteristic variables statistics of duration and severity of drought events in Shaoyang County during 1971-2022

特征量	干旱历时/月	干旱强度
均值	1.89	1.94
方差	1.67	2.24
1/4中位数	1.00	0.85
中位数	1.00	1.36
3/4中位数	2.00	2.52

图2 1971—2022年邵阳县干旱事件历时（a）和强度（b）分布及拟合曲线

Fig.2 Distribution of duration （a） and severity （b） of drought events and their fitting curves in Shaoyang County during 1971-2022

表4 基于不同类型Copula函数的1971—2022年邵阳县干旱事件历时和强度联合分布函数及拟合优度检验

Tab.4 The joint distribution function of duration and severity of drought events based on different types of Copula functions and goodness-of-fit test in Shaoyang County during 1971-2022

Copula函数类型	联合分布函数	θ拟合参数	$d 2$
Gumbel-Copula	$e - - l n H s 1 / θ + - l n G d 1 / θ θ$	2.199 2	0.011
Clayton-Copula	$H s - θ + G d - θ - 1 - 1 / θ$	2.175 0	0.019
Frank-Copula	$- 1 θ l n 1 + e - θ H s - 1 e - θ G d - 1 e - θ - 1$	7.215 3	0.018

表4 基于不同类型Copula函数的1971—2022年邵阳县干旱事件历时和强度联合分布函数及拟合优度检验

Tab.4 The joint distribution function of duration and severity of drought events based on different types of Copula functions and goodness-of-fit test in Shaoyang County during 1971-2022

Copula函数类型	联合分布函数	θ拟合参数	$d 2$
Gumbel-Copula	$e - - l n H s 1 / θ + - l n G d 1 / θ θ$	2.199 2	0.011
Clayton-Copula	$H s - θ + G d - θ - 1 - 1 / θ$	2.175 0	0.019
Frank-Copula	$- 1 θ l n 1 + e - θ H s - 1 e - θ G d - 1 e - θ - 1$	7.215 3	0.018

图3 基于Gumbel-Copula函数的1971—2022年邵阳县干旱事件联合分布密度（a）和累积概率（b）

Fig.3 The joint distribution density （a） and cumulative probability （b） of drought events based on Gumbel-Copula function in Shaoyang County during 1971-2022

图4 1971—2022年邵阳县干旱事件Ⅰ型（a）和Ⅱ型（b）联合重现期

Fig.4 The joint return periods of drought events for the type Ⅰ （a） and type Ⅱ （b） in Shaoyang County during 1971-2022

图5 1971—2022年邵阳县干旱事件的I型（a）和Ⅱ型（b）联合重现期分布（单位：a）

Fig.5 Distribution of joint return periods of drought events for the type Ⅰ （a） and type Ⅱ （b） in Shaoyang County during 1971-2022 （Unit： a）

表5 基于干旱历时和强度联合重现期的衡邵娄干旱走廊干旱等级划分标准

Tab.5 The classification standard of drought grades based on joint return period of drought duration and severity in the Heng-Shao-Lou drought corridor

干旱类型	干旱重现期/a	干旱历时/月，强度	累积概率/%
轻旱	0~1	$D ≤ 3, S ≤ 2.5$	（30.78， 100.00）
中旱	>1~2	$3 < D ≤ 5,2.5 < S ≤ 3.5$	（13.43， 30.78]
重旱	>2~6	$5 < D ≤ 8,3.5 < S ≤ 5.0$	（4.80， 13.43]
特旱	>6	$D > 8, S > 5.0$	（0.00， 4.80]

表5 基于干旱历时和强度联合重现期的衡邵娄干旱走廊干旱等级划分标准

Tab.5 The classification standard of drought grades based on joint return period of drought duration and severity in the Heng-Shao-Lou drought corridor

干旱类型	干旱重现期/a	干旱历时/月，强度	累积概率/%
轻旱	0~1	$D ≤ 3, S ≤ 2.5$	（30.78， 100.00）
中旱	>1~2	$3 < D ≤ 5,2.5 < S ≤ 3.5$	（13.43， 30.78]
重旱	>2~6	$5 < D ≤ 8,3.5 < S ≤ 5.0$	（4.80， 13.43]
特旱	>6	$D > 8, S > 5.0$	（0.00， 4.80]

表6 1971—2022年衡邵娄干旱走廊干旱事件统计

Tab.6 Statistics of drought events in the Heng-Shao-Lou drought corridor during 1971-2022

干旱类型	游程理论整合		干旱历时和强度联合重现期
干旱类型	干旱频数	干旱频率/%	干旱频数	干旱频率/%
轻旱	1 375	53.2	1 788	69.2
中旱	751	29.1	448	17.3
重旱	312	12.1	223	8.6
特旱	145	5.6	124	4.8

图6 1971—2022年衡邵娄干旱走廊不同类型干旱频率空间分布（单位：%）（a）轻旱，（b）中旱，（c）重旱，（d）特旱

Fig.6 Spatial distribution of drought frequency for different types in the Heng-Shao-Lou drought corridor during 1971-2022 （Unit： %）（a） slight drought，（b） moderate drought，（c） severe drought，（d） extreme drought

参考文献 35

[1]	陈再清, 侯威, 左冬冬, 等, 2016. 基于修订Copula函数的中国干旱特征研究[J]. 干旱气象, 34(2): 213-222. DOI
[2]	崔刚, 韩曦, 2015. 基于Copula理论的甘肃省干旱特征分析[J]. 人民黄河, 37(11): 77-80.
[3]	邓谷君, 1985. 湖南省水利志[M]. 长沙: 湖南省水利水电厅.
[4]	郭冬, 吐尔逊·哈斯木, 吴秀兰, 等, 2022. 四种气象干旱指数在新疆区域适用性研究[J]. 沙漠与绿洲气象, 16(3): 90-101.
[5]	国家气候中心,,, 中国气象局预报与网络司, 中国气象局兰州干旱气象研究所, 2017. 气象干旱等级: GB/T 20481—2017[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社.
[6]	韩会明, 游文荪, 简鸿福, 等, 2021. 赣江流域气象干旱与水文干旱特征及其概率关系[J]. 人民长江, 52(5): 44-49.
[7]	韩志慧, 刘小刚, 郝琨, 等, 2017. 基于SPI指数的内蒙古地区干旱演变特征及趋势研究[J]. 排灌机械工程学报, 35(5): 430-439.
[8]	黄梦杰, 贺新光, 卢希安, 2020. 长江流域的非平稳SPI干旱时空特征分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 29(7): 1 597-1 611.
[9]	黄荣辉, 周连童, 2002. 我国重大气候灾害特征、形成机理和预测研究[J]. 自然灾害学报, 11(1): 1-9.
[10]	李军, 王兆礼, 黄泽勤, 等, 2016. 基于SPEI的西南农业区气象干旱时空演变特征[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 25(7): 1 142-1 149.
[11]	李明, 张永清, 张莲芝, 2017. 基于Copula函数的长春市106年来的干旱特征分析[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 31(6): 147-153.
[12]	李稚, 李玉朋, 李鸿威, 等, 2022. 中亚地区干旱变化及其影响分析[J]. 地球科学进展, 37(1): 37-50. DOI
[13]	龙瑞昊, 畅建霞, 张鸿雪, 等, 2020. 基于Copula的澜沧江流域气象干旱风险分析[J]. 北京师范大学学报(自然科学版), 56(2): 265-274.
[14]	彭双姿, 刘鑫淼, 陈涛, 等, 2021. 衡邵干旱走廊干旱监测评估方法探讨[J]. 干旱气象, 39(6): 894-899.
[15]	王晓峰, 张园, 冯晓明, 等, 2017. 基于游程理论和Copula函数的干旱特征分析及应用[J]. 农业工程学报, 33(10): 206-214.
[16]	王瑛, 刘天雪, 李体上, 等, 2017. 中国中小型自然灾害的空间格局研究——以地震、洪涝、旱灾为例[J]. 自然灾害学报, 26(4): 48-55.
[17]	王兆礼, 李军, 黄泽勤, 等, 2016. 基于改进帕默尔干旱指数的中国气象干旱时空演变分析[J]. 农业工程学报, 32(2): 161-168.
[18]	余兴湛, 蒲义良, 康伯乾, 2022. 基于SPEI的广东省近50 a干旱时空特征[J]. 干旱气象, 40(6): 1 051-1 058.
[19]	袁先雷, 彭志潮, 刘雪宁, 2021. 新疆地区植被对多时间尺度干旱的响应研究[J]. 沙漠与绿洲气象, 15(3): 129-136.
[20]	张强, 2022. 科学解读“2022年长江流域重大干旱”[J]. 干旱气象, 40(4): 545-548. DOI
[21]	张强, 韩兰英, 张立阳, 等, 2014. 论气候变暖背景下干旱和干旱灾害风险特征与管理策略[J]. 地球科学进展, 29(1): 80-91. DOI
[22]	张午朝, 高冰, 马育军, 2019. 长江流域1961-2015年不同等级干旱时空变化分析[J]. 人民长江, 50(2): 53-57.
[23]	周莉, 周慧, 李巧媛, 等, 2020. 衡邵盆地的干旱时空分布特征及其与土地类型的关系[J]. 湖北农业科学, 59(14): 56-62.
[24]	朱静, 包光, 2020. 基于SPI的阿拉善盟1975—2010年干旱时空特征研究[J]. 宝鸡文理学院学报(自然科学版), 40(1): 78-84.
[25]	ABRAMOWITZ M, STEGUN I A, 1964. Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables[M]. Washington D C: U.S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau of Standards.
[26]	HENRY A J, 1906. The climatology of the United States[M]. Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Weather Bureau, Bulletin Q.
[27]	HERBST P H, BREDENKAMP D B, BARKER H M G, 1966. A technique for the evaluation of drought from rainfall data[J]. Journal of hydrology, 4: 264-272. DOI URL
[28]	HUANG J P, YU H P, GUAN X D, et al, 2016. Accelerated dryland expansion under climate change[J]. Nature Climate Change, 6(2): 166-172. DOI
[29]	MCKEE T B, DOESKEN N J, KLEIST J, 1993. The relationship of drought frequency and duration to time scales[C]// In proceedings of the 8th Conference on Applied Climatology, Anaheim, California, American Meteorological Society: 179-184.
[30]	PALMER W C, 1965. Meteorological drought[M]. Washington D C: U.S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau.
[31]	SHIAU J T, 2006. Fitting drought duration and severity with two-dimensional Copulas[J]. Water Resources Management, 20(5): 795-815. DOI URL
[32]	SHIAU J T, SHEN H W, 2001. Recurrence analysis of hydrologic droughts of differing severity[J]. Journal of Water Resources Planning Management, 127(1): 30-40. DOI URL
[33]	SHUKLA S, WOOD A W, 2008. Use of a standardized runoff index for characterizing hydrologic drought[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 35(2), L02405. DOI: 10.1029/2007GL032487. DOI
[34]	SKLAR A, 1959. Fonctions de répartition à n dimensions et leurs marges[J]. Publications de l’ Institut de Statistique de l’ Université de Paris, 8: 229-231.
[35]	VICENTE-SERRANO S M, BEGUERÍA S, LÓPEZ-MORENO J I, 2010. A multi-scalar drought index sensitive to global warming: the standardized precipitation evapotranspiration index[J]. Journal of Climate, 23(7): 1 696-1 718. DOI URL