光化学植被指数估算植物光能利用率的研究进展

doi:10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2008.03.023

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

应用遥感技术可以建立光化学植被指数(Photochemical reflectance index, PRI)和光能利用效率(Light use efficiency, LUE)的关系,LUE可用来估算净初级生产力(Net primary productivity, NPP)。因而,用PRI估算植物的LUE,为估算NPP提供了新的方法,弥补了以往以经验模式通过温度和水分对最大LUE的胁迫来获取实际LUE的不足,进而可提高 NPP 的估算精度。研究表明:PRI和LUE在叶片、冠层和景观尺度上都有着很好的相关性,但是随着尺度的变化,很多因素会对这一关系产生干扰,如水分、氮元素含量、叶面积指数和太阳高度角等,从而削弱了PRI和LUE的关系。该文对建立PRI和LUE的关系过程中的影响因素进行了分析,并指出今后这一研究领域中可能改进的方面,主要包括526 nm 和545 nm 处的反射率对531 nm 处的反射率的作用机制、PRI随LUE的饱和现象、PRI和LUE关系的时间效应以及利用PRI估算LUE的尺度效应。

关键词: 光化学植被指数(PRI), 光能利用效率(LUE), 影响因素

Abstract:

Remote sensing technology has provided a rapid, nondestructive method for establishing relationships between photochemical reflectance index (PRI) and photosynthetic light use efficiency (LUE) that is an important parameter for estimating net primary productivity (NPP). Therefore, PRI opens a new era of estimating NPP that can overcome the shortcomings of the empirical model in obtaining LUE through information on temperature and water content. Many studies have demonstrated that a reliable relationship between PRI and LUE could be obtained at leaf, canopy and site scales. However, numerous confounding factors such as water content, leaf nitrogen concentration, leaf area index and sun zenith angle have emerged as scale changed, leading to disjunctive relationship betweenPRI and LUE. Thus, the functions of different factors on the relationship between PRI and LUE are important in understanding the mechanism for LUE estimation. This paper analyzes the confounding factors in establishing relationships between PRI and LUE and outlines possible improvements. Further research is needed on the different mechanism of reflectance at 526 nm and 545 nm relating to reflectance at 531 nm, the saturation problem of PRI with increase of LUE and the time and scale effects in estimating LUE with PRI.

Key words: photochemical reflectance index (PRI), light use efficiency (LUE), disturbance

吴朝阳, 牛铮. 光化学植被指数估算植物光能利用率的研究进展. 植物生态学报, 2008, 32(3): 734-740. DOI: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2008.03.023

WU Chao-Yang, NIU Zheng. REVIEW OF RETRIEVAL LIGHT USE EFFICIENCY USING PHOTOCHEMICAL REFLECTANCE INDEX (PRI). Chinese Journal of Plant Ecology, 2008, 32(3): 734-740. DOI: 10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2008.03.023

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/10.3773/j.issn.1005-264x.2008.03.023

https://www.plant-ecology.com/CN/Y2008/V32/I3/734

图/表 3

参考文献 37

[1]	Barton CVM, Plummer SE (1999). Modelling the plant physiological basis for assessing vegetation stress using remote sensing. In: Ceulemans RJM, Veroustraete F, Gond V, Van Rensbergen JBH eds. Forest Ecosystem Modelling, Upscaling and Remote Sensing. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague,197-200.
[2]	Barton CVM, North PRJ (2001). Remote sensing of canopy light use efficiency using the photochemical reflectance index model and sensitivity analysis. Remote Sensing of Environment, 78,264-273.
[3]	Bilger W, Bjorkman O, Thayer SS (1989). Light induced spectral absorbance changes in relation to photosynthesis and the expoxidation state of xanthophyll cycle components in cotton leaves. Plant Physiology, 91,542-551.
[4]	Bjǒrkman O, Demmig-Adams B (1994). Regulation of photosynthetic light energy capture, conversion and dissipation in leaves of higher plants. In: Schulze ED, Caldwell MM eds. Ecophysiology of Photosynthesis, Ecological Studies 100. Springer, Berlin,17-47.
[5]	Blackburn GA (1998a). Spectral indices for estimating photosynthetic pigment concentrations: a test using senescent tree leaves. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 19,657-675.
[6]	Blackburn GA (1998b). Quantifying chlorophylls and carotenoids at leaf and canopy scales: an evaluation of some hyperspectral approaches. Remote Sensing of Environment, 66,273-285.
[7]	Carter GA, Cibula WG, Miller RL (1996). Narrow band reflectance imagery compared with thermal imagery for early detection of plant stress. Journal of Plant Physiology, 148,515-522.
[8]	Dawson TP, Curran PJ (1998). A new technique for interpolating the reflectance red edge position. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 19,2133-2139.
[9]	Drolet GG, Huemmrich KF, Hall FG (2005). A MODIS-derived photochemical reflectance index to detect inter-annual variations in the photosynthetic light-use efficiency of a boreal deciduous forest. Remote Sensing of Environment, 98,212-224.
[10]	Filella I, Amaro T, Araus JL, Peňuelas J (1996). Relationship between photosynthetic radiation-use efficiency of barley canopies and the photochemical reflectance index (PRI). Physiologia Plantarum, 96,211-216.
[11]	Filella I, Peňuelas J, Llorens L (2004). Reflectance assessment of seasonal and annual changes in biomass and CO ₂ uptake of a Mediterranean shrubland submitted to experimental warming and drought . Remote Sensing of Environment, 90,308-318.
[12]	Gamon JA, Field CB, Bilger W, Bjǒrkman O, Fredeen AL, Peňuelas J (1990). Remote sensing of the xanthophyll cycle and chlorophyll fluorescence in sunflower leaves and canopies. Oecologia, 85,1-7.
[13]	Gamon JA, Peňuelas J, Field CB (1992). A narrow waveband spectral index that tracks diurnal changes in photosynthetic efficiency. Remote Sensing of Environment, 41,35-44.
[14]	Gamon JA, Field CB, Goulden ML (1995). Relationships between NDVI, canopy structure, and photosynthesis in three Californian vegetation types . Ecological Applications, 5,28-41.
[15]	Gamon JA, Serrano L, Surfus JS (1997). The photochemical reflectance index: an optical indicator of photosynthesis radiation use efficiency across species, functional types, and nutrient levels. Oecologia, 112,492-501.
[16]	Goel NS (1988). Models of vegetation canopy reflectance and their use in estimation of biophysical parameters from reflectance data. Remote Sensing Reviews, 4,1-222.
[17]	Goward SN, Huemmrich KF (1992). Vegetation canopy PAR absorptance and the normalised difference vegetation index: an assessment using the SAIL model . Remote Sensing of Environment, 39,119-140.
[18]	Inoue Y, Peňuelas J (2006). Relationship between light use efficiency and photochemical reflectance index in soybean leaves as affected by soil water content. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 27,5109-5114.
[19]	Justice CO, Vermote E, Townshend JRG (1998). The moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer (MODIS): land remote sensing for global change research. IEEE Transactions on Geosciences and Remote Sensing, 36,1228-1249.
[20]	Lloyd JL, Taylor JA (1994). On the temperature dependence of soil respiration. Functional Ecology, 8,315-323.
[21]	Mehthy M (2000). A two-channel hyperspectral radiometer for the assessment of photosynthetic radiation-use efficiency. Journal of Agriculture and Engineering Research, 75,107-110.
[22]	Myneni RB, Ross J, Asrar G (1989). A review on the theory of photon transport in leaf canopies. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 45,1-153.
[23]	Nakaji T, Oguma H, Fujinuma Y (2006). Seasonal changes in the relationship between photochemical reflectance index and photosynthetic light use efficiency of Japanese larch needles. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 27,493-509.
[24]	Nichol CJ, Huemmrich KF, Black TA (2000). Remote sensing of photosynthetic-light-use efficiency of boreal forest. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 101,131-142.
[25]	Nichol CJ, Lloyd J, Shibistova O (2002). Remote sensing of photosynthetic-light-use efficiency of a Siberian boreal forest. Tellus, 54B,677-687.
[26]	Peňuelas J, Filella I, Gamon JA (1995). Assessment of photosynthetic radiation-use efficiency with spectral reflectance. New Phytologist, 131,291-296.
[27]	Peňuelas J, Llusia J, Pinaol J, Filella I (1997). Photochemical reflectance index and leaf photosynthetic radiation-use-efficiency assessment in Mediterranean trees. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 18,2863-2868.
[28]	Peňuelas J, Filella I (1998). Visible and near-infrared reflectance techniques for diagnosing plant physiological status. Trends in Plant Science, 3,151-156.
[29]	Peňuelas J, Gamon J, Freeden A (1994). Reflectance indices associated with physiological changes in nitrogen- and water-limited sunflower leaves. Remote Sensing of Environment, 48,135-146.
[30]	Peňuelas J, Inoue Y (2000). Reflectance assessment of canopy CO ₂ uptake . International Journal of Remote Sensing, 21,3353-3356.
[31]	Running SR, Nemani RR (1998). Relating seasonal patterns of the AVHRR vegetation index to simulated photosynthesis and transpiration of forests in different climates. Remote Sensing of Environment, 4,347-367.
[32]	Sellers PJ, Hall FG, Margolis H, Kelly B (1995). The boreal-ecosystem-atmosphere-study (BOREAS): an overview and early results from the 1994 field year. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 76,1549-1577.
[33]	Stylinski CD, Gamon JA, Oechel WC (2002). Seasonal patterns of reflectance indices, carotenoid pigments and photosynthesis of evergreen chaparral species. Oecologia, 131,366-374.
[34]	Tenhunen JD, Catarino FM, Lange OL, Oechel WC (1987). Plant Responses to Stress. Functional Analysis in Mediterranean Ecosystems. Springer, Berlin.
[35]	Thenot F, Methy M, Winkel T (2002). The photochemical reflectance index ( PRI) as a water-stress index . International Journal of Remote Sensing, 23,5135-5139.
[36]	Trotter GM, Whitehead D, Pinkney EJ (2002). The photochemical reflectance index as a measure of photosynthetic light use efficiency for plants with varying foliar nitrogen contents. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 23,1207-1212.
[37]	Tucker CJ (1979). Red and photographic infrared linear combinations for monitoring vegetation. Remote Sensing of Environment, 8,127-150.

类型Type	公式 Formula	来源 Sources
线性 Linearity	PRI=20LUE-0.4	Peňuelaset al., 1997
	PRI=33.3LUE-0.53	Peňuelaset al., 1997
	PRI=5.98LUE-0.093	Nichol et al., 2000
非线性 Nonlinearity	PRI=0.16(LUE-0.009 6)/(0.012+LUE-0.009 6)	Peňuelaset al., 1995

类型Type	公式 Formula	来源 Sources
线性 Linearity	PRI=20LUE-0.4	Peňuelaset al., 1997
	PRI=33.3LUE-0.53	Peňuelaset al., 1997
	PRI=5.98LUE-0.093	Nichol et al., 2000
非线性 Nonlinearity	PRI=0.16(LUE-0.009 6)/(0.012+LUE-0.009 6)	Peňuelaset al., 1995

干扰 Interferences	PRI响应 PRI responses	来源 Sources
叶片取向 Leaf direction	水平 Planophile	6.23%	Barton & North, 2001
	垂直 Erectophile	-7.52%
物种数量 Species number	单一种 Single species	R²=0.97, p<0.001	Nichol et al., 2002
	8物种 Eight species	R²=0.79, p<0.001	Trotter et al., 2002
物候变化 Seasonal change	单一时相 Single time	稳定 Stabilization	Trotter et al., 2002
	四季 Four seasons	斜率、截距变化 Slope and intercept change	Nakaji et al., 2006
叶面积指数LAI	3.0	1.0	-143.80%	Barton & North, 2001
	3.0	5.0	22.89%
几何关系 Geometrical relationship	太阳天顶角 Sun zenith angle	45°	60°	41.23%	Barton & North, 2001
		45°	30°	-26.70%
	观测天顶角 View zenith angle	天底角 Nadir	30°	35.51%
			-30°	-20.24%
湿土壤 Wet soil 干土壤 Dry soil		-18.83%	Barton & North, 2001

干扰 Interferences	PRI响应 PRI responses	来源 Sources
叶片取向 Leaf direction	水平 Planophile	6.23%	Barton & North, 2001
	垂直 Erectophile	-7.52%
物种数量 Species number	单一种 Single species	R²=0.97, p<0.001	Nichol et al., 2002
	8物种 Eight species	R²=0.79, p<0.001	Trotter et al., 2002
物候变化 Seasonal change	单一时相 Single time	稳定 Stabilization	Trotter et al., 2002
	四季 Four seasons	斜率、截距变化 Slope and intercept change	Nakaji et al., 2006
叶面积指数LAI	3.0	1.0	-143.80%	Barton & North, 2001
	3.0	5.0	22.89%
几何关系 Geometrical relationship	太阳天顶角 Sun zenith angle	45°	60°	41.23%	Barton & North, 2001
		45°	30°	-26.70%
	观测天顶角 View zenith angle	天底角 Nadir	30°	35.51%
			-30°	-20.24%
湿土壤 Wet soil 干土壤 Dry soil		-18.83%	Barton & North, 2001