Risk Assessment of Combined Stress of High Temperature and Drought on Summer Maize in Henan Province

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2023-0640

Abstract

Abstract:

In this paper, the risk assessment system for high temperature and drought combined stress of summer maize in Henan Province was constructed, and the weight distribution of drought comprehensive risk and high temperature comprehensive risk was calculated by using analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The paper also comprehensively evaluated the risk distribution from four aspects: the risk of disaster causing factors, the exposure of carriers, the vulnerability of disaster pregnant environment, and the ability of disaster prevention and reduction. The results show that the areas with high comprehensive risk of drought are mainly concentrated in the north of Henan Province, and the areas with high comprehensive risk of high temperature are mainly concentrated in the south of Henan Province. The comprehensive assessment system for drought and high temperature combined stress disasters of summer maize in Henan Province was constructed, and the weights of drought risk and high temperature risk were 0.4938 and 0.5062 respectively. The risk distribution of combined high temperature and drought stress was not closely related to latitude, but was also influenced by various factors such as natural conditions. Most parts of the province are in low-risk areas, and the high-risk areas are mainly concentrated in western Henan and a small part of the southwest. The evaluation results provide theoretical support for disaster prevention and reduction and ensuring the production of corn in Henan Province.

Key words: summer maize, high temperature stress, drought stress, compound stress, risk assessment, analytic hierarchy process(AHP)

LI Haoning, REN Liwei. Risk Assessment of Combined Stress of High Temperature and Drought on Summer Maize in Henan Province[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(36): 9-16.

Figures/Tables 14

References 20

[1]	SEMENOV M A, STRATONOVITCH P, ALGHABARI F, et al. Adapting wheat in Europe for climate change[J]. Journal of cereal science, 2014, 59(3):245-256. pmid: 24882934
[2]	SUSANA S A, STEVE B. Abiotic stress responses in legumes: strategies used to cope with environmental challenges[J]. Critical reviews in plant sciences, 2015, 34(1-3):237-280.
[3]	WANG G P, HUI Z, LI F. Improvement of heat and drought photosynthetic tolerance in wheat by over accumulation of glycinebetaine[J]. Plant biotechnology reports, 2010, 4(3):213-222.
[4]	齐伟, 张吉旺, 王空军, 等. 干旱胁迫对不同耐旱性玉米杂交种产量和根系生理特性的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2010, 21(1):48-52.
[5]	王丽君. 黄淮海平原夏玉米季干旱、高温的发生特征及对产量的影响[D]. 北京: 中国农业大学, 2018.
[6]	杨国虎. 玉米花粉花丝耐热性研究进展[J]. 种子, 2005(2):47-51.
[7]	王占彪, 王猛, 尹小刚, 等. 气候变化背景下华北平原夏玉米各生育期水热时空变化特征[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2015, 23(4):473-481.
[8]	李德, 孙义, 孙有丰. 淮北平原夏玉米花期高温热害综合气候指标研究[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2015, 23(8):1035-1044.
[9]	JERRY L H, JOHN H P. Temperature extremes: effect on plant growth and development[J]. Weather and climate extremes, 2015, 10(PA).
[10]	刘冰, 薛澜. “管理极端气候事件和灾害风险特别报告”对我国的启示[J]. 中国行政管理, 2012(3):92-95.
[11]	王帅. 基于碳排放约束的河南省县域农业水土资源优化研究[D]. 郑州: 华北水利水电大学, 2020.
[12]	刘晓英, 郝国松, 田佳丽, 等. 气候变化对三河地区夏玉米生产适应性研究[J]. 农业灾害研究, 2021, 11(1):51-54.
[13]	王劲松, 郭江勇, 周跃武, 等. 干旱指标研究的进展与展望[J]. 干旱区地理, 2007(1):60-65.
[14]	于照堃, 李忠涛, 丰玉涣, 等. 基于GIS的气象灾害风险区划分析——以河南省为例[J]. 山东理工大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 36(1):27-32.
[15]	徐延红, 刘天学, 方文松, 等. 河南省夏玉米花期高温热害风险分析[J]. 中国农业气象, 2021, 42(10):879-888.
[16]	中国气象局. 北方夏玉米干旱等级:QX/T 260—2015[S]. 北京: 气象出版社, 2015.
[17]	程运平. 河南省农业干旱风险评价及区划[D]. 郑州: 华北水利水电大学, 2016.
[18]	李学文. 夏玉米生育期水分供需平衡状况及干旱时空特征[D]. 芜湖: 安徽师范大学, 2018.
[19]	陈怀亮, 李树岩. 气候变暖背景下河南省夏玉米花期高温灾害风险预估[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2020, 28(3):337-348.
[20]	王秀萍, 方文松, 杜子璇, 等. 夏玉米花期高温热害时空分布特征[J]. 玉米科学, 2021, 29(1):61-68.

干旱等级	作物水分亏缺指数(CWDI)
干旱等级	播种—出苗	出苗—拔节	拔节—抽雄	抽雄—乳熟	乳熟—成熟	全生育期
无旱	<35	<40	<20	<10	<35	<35
轻旱	35~45	40~55	20~35	10~25	35~50	35~50
中旱	45~50	55~65	35~55	25~45	50~65	50~65
重旱	50~55	65~75	55~65	45~55	65~75	65~80
特旱	≥55	≥75	≥65	≥55	≥75	≥80

干旱等级	作物水分亏缺指数(CWDI)
干旱等级	播种—出苗	出苗—拔节	拔节—抽雄	抽雄—乳熟	乳熟—成熟	全生育期
无旱	<35	<40	<20	<10	<35	<35
轻旱	35~45	40~55	20~35	10~25	35~50	35~50
中旱	45~50	55~65	35~55	25~45	50~65	50~65
重旱	50~55	65~75	55~65	45~55	65~75	65~80
特旱	≥55	≥75	≥65	≥55	≥75	≥80

	危险性H	暴露性E	脆弱性V	防灾减灾能力RE
高温评估	0.5080	0.1545	0.2449	0.0926
干旱评估	0.4829	0.1570	0.2720	0.0882

	危险性H	暴露性E	脆弱性V	防灾减灾能力RE
高温评估	0.5080	0.1545	0.2449	0.0926
干旱评估	0.4829	0.1570	0.2720	0.0882

重要性	危险性H	暴露性E	脆弱性V	防灾减灾能力RE
危险性H	1	3	2	5
暴露性E	1/3	1	1/2	2
脆弱性V	1/2	2	1	3
防灾减灾能力RE	1/5	1/2	1/3	1