The Characteristics of Climate Change in Main Growing Stages of Blueberry from 1968 to 2018 in Qingpu, Shanghai

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0409

Abstract

Abstract:

By using the meteorological data of Qingpu national meteorological station from 1968 to 2018, we selected the standardized precipitation evapotranspiration index (SPEI) to analyze the evolution characteristics and the frequency of drought and flood in flowering stage, fruiting stage and maturity stage of blueberry in Qingpu. The results showed that: (1) the average temperature was 16.2℃ and increased significantly, the precipitation had obvious fluctuation, the temperature in different growth stages of blueberry had an upward trend, the precipitation showed an increasing trend in flowering and maturation stage, and a decreasing trend in fruiting stage; (2) an obvious interannual variation of drought and flood was observed in Qingpu, in the 1980s, 1990s and 2010s, the climate was wet, however, the climate in the 1970s and 2000s was relative dry; meanwhile, the evolution characteristics of drought and flood were different during different seasons, the alternation of drought and humidity was observed in the 1970s; in the 1980s, alternation of drought and humidity was found in spring and winter, while summer and autumn were generally humid; from 1990s to 2000s, the change from humidity to drought was observed in spring, summer and autumn, while the change from drought to humidity was found in winter; in the 2010s, summer, autumn and winter were wet, while spring had the alternation of drought and humidity; (3) the frequency of drought was 27.5%, 25.5% and 21.6% in flowering stage, fruiting stage and maturity stage of blueberry, and the frequency of humidity was 29.4%, 27.5% and 27.5%, respectively. The study suggests that in Qingpu, there is a tendency towards drought in flowering stage and fruiting stage of blueberry, while a tendency towards humidity in maturity stage, the frequency of humidity is more than that of drought on the whole.

Key words: blueberry, growth stage, drought and flood, SPEI index, production, Qingpu

CLC Number:

S162

ZHENG Zehua, YU Yanlue, MA Zhongfen, ZHU Huaiwei. The Characteristics of Climate Change in Main Growing Stages of Blueberry from 1968 to 2018 in Qingpu, Shanghai[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(10): 97-105.

Figures/Tables 6

References 41

[1]	温靖, 关小莺, 徐玉娟, 等. 不同蓝莓品种品质特性研究[J]. 热带作物学报, 2018, 39(9):1846-1855.
[2]	陈宏毅. 我国北方耐寒蓝莓品种选择的研究[J]. 北京农业, 2011(30):57-59.
[3]	吴林. 中国蓝莓35年--科学研究与产业发展[J]. 吉林农业大学学报, 2016, 38(1):1-11.
[4]	何科佳, 曾斌, 张力, 等. 我国蓝莓种质资源利用研究进展[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2013(23):14-17.
[5]	KRIKORIAN R, SHIDLER M D, NASH T A, et al. Blueberry supplementation improves memory in older adults[J]. Journal of agricultural and food chemistry, 2010, 58(7):3996-4000. doi: 10.1021/jf9029332 URL
[6]	刘薇, 王君, 刘德明, 等. 分光光度法测定蓝莓果中维生素C的含量[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2013(2):35-36.
[7]	CASEDAS G, LES F, GOMEZ-SERRANILLOS M P, et al. Anthocyanin profile, antioxidant activity and enzyme inhibiting properties of blueberry and cranberry juices: a comparative study[J]. Food & function, 2017, 8(11):4187-4193.
[8]	ROCHA D M U P, CALDAS A P S, BÁRBARA Pereira Da Silva, et al. Effects of blueberry and cranberry consumption on type 2 diabetes glycemic control: A systematic review[J]. Critical reviews in food science & nutrition, 2018, 59:1-13.
[9]	DAVIDSON K T, ZHU Z, BALABANOV D, et al. Beyond conventional medicine- a look at blueberry, a cancer-fighting superfruit[J]. Pathology & oncology research, 2018, 24:733-738.
[10]	周琳, 张会慧, 魏殿文, 等. 控水灌溉和覆膜对蓝莓植株生长特性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2015, 31(19):67-73.
[11]	方仲相, 胡君艳, 江波, 等. 蓝莓研究进展[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2013, 30(4):599-606.
[12]	陈文荣, 曾玮玮, 李云霞, 等. 高丛蓝莓对干旱胁迫的生理响应及其抗旱性综合评价[J]. 园艺学报, 2012, 39(4):637-646.
[13]	乌凤章, 王贺新, 陈英敏, 等. 我国蓝莓生理生态研究进展[J]. 北方园艺, 2006(3):48-49.
[14]	陈天贵, 陆霞. 柳城县蓝莓栽培的生态环境及可行性分析[J]. 南方园艺, 2018, 29(5):34-36.
[15]	张会慧, 田褀, 刘关君, 等. 转2-CysPrx基因烟草抗氧化酶和PSII电子传递对盐和光胁迫的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2013, 39(11):2023-2029. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2013.02023
[16]	康西言, 李春强, 杨荣芳. 河北省冬小麦生育期干旱特征及成因分析[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2018, 36(3):210-217.
[17]	于文金, 周鸿渐, 占达颖, 等. 长江流域旱涝灾害特征研究[J]. 灾害学, 2013, 28(3):42-47.
[18]	段莹, 王文, 蔡晓军. PDSI、SPEI及CI指数在2010/2011年冬、春季江淮流域干旱过程的应用分析[J]. 高原气象, 2013, 32(4):1126-1139. doi: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-0534.2012.00106
[19]	VICENTE-SERRANO S M, BEGUERÍA S, LÓPEZ-MORENO J I. A multiscalar drought index sensitive to global warming the standardized precipitation evapotranspiration index[J]. Journal of climate, 2010, 23(7):1696-1718. doi: 10.1175/2009JCLI2909.1 URL
[20]	VICENTE-SERRANO S M, BEGUERÍA S, LÓPEZ-MORENO J I, et al. A new global 0.5° gridded dataset (1901-2006) of a multiscalar drought index: Comparison with current drought index data-sets based on the Palmer Drought Severity Index[J]. Journal of hydrometeor, 2010, 11(4):1033-1043. doi: 10.1175/2010JHM1224.1 URL
[21]	VICENTE-SERRANO S M, LÓPEZ-MORENO J I, LORENZO-LACRUZ J, et al. The NAO impact on droughts in the Mediterranean region[A]. //Hydrological, Socioeconomic and Ecological Impacts of the North Atlantic Oscillation in the Mediterranean Region[M]. Springer Netherlands, 2011:23-40.
[22]	庄少伟, 左洪超, 任鹏程, 等. 标准化降水蒸发指数在中国区域的应用[J]. 气候与环境研究, 2013, 18(5):617-625.
[23]	杨庆, 李明星, 郑子彦, 等. 7种气象干旱指数的中国区域适应性[J]. 中国科学:地球科学, 2017, 47(3):337-353.
[24]	王米雪, 延军平, 李双双. 1960-2013年中国东南沿海地区旱涝时空变化特征及其趋势分析[J]. 资源科学, 2014, 36(11):2307-2315.
[25]	郭树龙, 温季, 姜新. 基于SPEI的1960-2015年江汉平原旱涝规律分析及预测[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2018, 37(9):108-115.
[26]	高超, 尹周祥, 许莹. 淮河流域冬小麦主要生育期旱涝时空特征及对产量的影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2017, 33(22):103-111.
[27]	韦潇宇, 胡琦, 马雪晴, 等. 基于SPEI的华北平原夏玉米生长季干旱时空变化特征[J]. 干旱气象, 2018, 36(4):554-560,577.
[28]	姜纪峰, 顾芹芹, 田展, 等. 上海市青浦区近50年气候变化及其对农业生产的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2013, 41(2):349-353.
[29]	杨燕林, 王朝文, 和志娇, 等. 滇西北不同生态条件下蓝莓品种的表现[J]. 农学学报, 2014, 4(2):75-78.
[30]	BEGUERÍA S, VICENTE-SERRANO S M. SPEI: Calculation of the standardised precipitation-evapotranspiration index[J]. Risk & decision analysis, 2017, 4(4):25-38.
[31]	张存杰, 刘海波, 宋艳玲, 等. GB/T 20481-2017气象干旱等级[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2017.
[32]	魏凤英. 现代气候统计诊断与预测技术(2版)[M]. 北京: 气象出版社, 2007:1-269.
[33]	顾姻, 贺善安. 蓝浆果与蔓越桔[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2001.
[34]	李亚东, 张志东, 吴林, 等. 我国越桔生产区域化和产业化的建议[J]. 中国果树, 2001(2):48-50.
[35]	张丹. 蓝莓栽培技术要点探究[J]. 种子科技, 2018, 36(9):74,77.
[36]	吴玉秋, 祝宏, 孟庆国. 蓝莓栽培管理[J]. 特种经济动植物, 2010, 13(8):47.
[37]	李永强, 郭卫东. 南方蓝莓栽培管理技术[J]. 今日科技, 2013(11):54-55.
[38]	高丽霞, 肖化兰, 李森, 等. 广东省蓝莓发展现状与展望[J]. 广东农业科学, 2015, 42(6):30-34.
[39]	才丰, 崔英宇, 杨玉春. 土壤环境对蓝莓生长的影响[J]. 辽宁农业科学, 2013(1):45-48.
[40]	张美艳. 蓝莓科学建园技术[J]. 山西林业, 2018(S1):56-57.
[41]	吴慧, 张慧琴, 马常念, 等. 南高丛越橘与兔眼越橘果实品质及抗氧化能力的比较[J]. 果树学报, 2011, 28(6):1045-1049.

序号	旱涝等级	SPEI指数
1	极端湿润	2.0<SPEI
2	重度湿润	1.5<SPEI≤2.0
3	中度湿润	1.0<SPEI≤1.5
4	轻度湿润	0.5<SPEI≤1.0
5	正常	-0.5≤SPEI≤0.5
6	轻度干旱	-1.0≤SPEI<-0.5
7	中度干旱	-1.5≤SPEI<-1.0
8	重度干旱	-2.0≤SPEI<-1.5
9	极端干旱	SPEI<-2.0

序号	旱涝等级	SPEI指数
1	极端湿润	2.0<SPEI
2	重度湿润	1.5<SPEI≤2.0
3	中度湿润	1.0<SPEI≤1.5
4	轻度湿润	0.5<SPEI≤1.0
5	正常	-0.5≤SPEI≤0.5
6	轻度干旱	-1.0≤SPEI<-0.5
7	中度干旱	-1.5≤SPEI<-1.0
8	重度干旱	-2.0≤SPEI<-1.5
9	极端干旱	SPEI<-2.0

旱涝等级	花期				果期				成熟期				花期至成熟期
旱涝等级	P1	P2	P3	P4	P1	P2	P3	P4	P1	P2	P3	P4	P1	P2	P3	P4
极端湿润	—	—	—	—	6.7	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
重度湿润	—	—	—	—	—	7.7	6.3	—	—	—	6.3	14.3	6.7	—	12.5	14.3
中度湿润	20	23.1	—	—	—	15.4	—	—	6.7	15.4	—	—	6.7	30.8	—	—
轻度湿润	13.3	15.4	25	14.3	26.7	15.4	6.3	28.6	13.3	7.7	25	28.6	6.7	30.8	—	14.3
湿润	33.3	38.5	25	14.3	33.3	38.5	12.5	28.6	20	23.1	31.3	42.9	20	61.5	12.5	28.6
干旱	13.3	—	62.5	28.6	13.3	7.7	43.8	42.9	40	7.7	25	—	20	—	50	14.3
轻度干旱	—	—	25	14.3	6.7	7.7	18.8	42.9	13.3	7.7	6.3	—	13.3	—	18.8	14.3
中度干旱	13.3	—	18.8	14.3	6.7	—	12.5	—	20	—	18.8	—	6.7	—	6.3	—
重度干旱	—	—	12.5	—	—	—	12.5	—	6.7	—	—	—	—	—	25	—
极端干旱	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—

旱涝等级	花期				果期				成熟期				花期至成熟期
旱涝等级	P1	P2	P3	P4	P1	P2	P3	P4	P1	P2	P3	P4	P1	P2	P3	P4
极端湿润	—	—	—	—	6.7	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
重度湿润	—	—	—	—	—	7.7	6.3	—	—	—	6.3	14.3	6.7	—	12.5	14.3
中度湿润	20	23.1	—	—	—	15.4	—	—	6.7	15.4	—	—	6.7	30.8	—	—
轻度湿润	13.3	15.4	25	14.3	26.7	15.4	6.3	28.6	13.3	7.7	25	28.6	6.7	30.8	—	14.3
湿润	33.3	38.5	25	14.3	33.3	38.5	12.5	28.6	20	23.1	31.3	42.9	20	61.5	12.5	28.6
干旱	13.3	—	62.5	28.6	13.3	7.7	43.8	42.9	40	7.7	25	—	20	—	50	14.3
轻度干旱	—	—	25	14.3	6.7	7.7	18.8	42.9	13.3	7.7	6.3	—	13.3	—	18.8	14.3
中度干旱	13.3	—	18.8	14.3	6.7	—	12.5	—	20	—	18.8	—	6.7	—	6.3	—
重度干旱	—	—	12.5	—	—	—	12.5	—	6.7	—	—	—	—	—	25	—
极端干旱	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—