Winter wheat meteorological service benefit quantitative evaluation method based on field experiment

Abstract

The invention discloses a winter wheat meteorological service benefit quantitative evaluation method based on a field experiment, and aims to solve the technical problem of lack of a quantitative evaluation analysis method for agricultural meteorological service information response based on a field production environment at present. According to the method, based on field experiments, quantitative evaluation is carried out on winter wheat meteorological service benefits from three aspects of different agrometeorological disaster risk early warning information benefits, response of key growth periods to agrometeorological service information and comprehensive benefits generated by agrometeorological services. According to the invention, the interference of subjective judgment is reduced, the accuracy and reliability of the evaluation result are improved, the benefits of agricultural meteorological service information in agricultural production are clarified, and the method has an important guiding effect on further improvement of crop yield.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of meteorological service evaluation, and specifically to a quantitative evaluation method for winter wheat meteorological service benefits based on field experiments. Background Art

[0002] Meteorological service benefits refer to the comparison between resource consumption and effective benefits in meteorological service activities, which mainly play a role in society, economy, ecological environment and human activities through the functions of seeking benefits and avoiding harm. Agriculture is one of the industries most closely affected by meteorological factors. The evaluation of the benefits of agricultural meteorological services is to measure the contribution rate of meteorological services to agricultural production, provide a basis for departmental cooperation and linkage, and also provide a scientific theoretical basis for the meteorological department to rationally allocate service resources and better serve agriculture.

[0003] The methods for evaluating the benefits of agricultural meteorological services mainly include the analytic hierarchy process, the loss matrix method, the Delphi method (expert survey method), the shadow price method, the Bayesian decision theory, etc. Due to the cost complexity of agricultural meteorological service information itself and the unmeasurability of service scope and impact, the Delphi method based on questionnaire surveys and expert evaluation is currently commonly used, but this method has a certain degree of subjectivity; the field test method has good objectivity and is one of the important supplementary means for the study of agricultural meteorological service benefit evaluation. At present, there is a lack of quantitative evaluation and analysis of the response to agricultural meteorological service information under field production environment. Therefore, it is urgent to develop an evaluation and analysis method based on field experiments to evaluate the impact of agricultural meteorological service information on crops.

[0004] The information disclosed in this background technology section is only used to deepen the understanding of the background technology of the present disclosure, and should not be regarded as acknowledging or suggesting in any form that the information constitutes the prior art known to those skilled in the art. Summary of the invention

[0005] The present application provides a quantitative evaluation method for the benefits of winter wheat meteorological services based on field experiments, aiming to solve the current technical problem of the lack of quantitative evaluation and analysis methods for the response to agricultural meteorological service information under field production environments.

[0006] The present disclosure provides a method and application for quantitative evaluation of winter wheat meteorological service benefits based on field experiments, comprising the following steps: (1) Three treatment areas, namely, full response area, partial response area and non-response area, were set up in the field test area to be evaluated.

[0007] (2) Respond to agricultural meteorological warning signals and farming advice for each treatment area.

[0008] (3) Record field management according to the growth period of winter wheat and collect field management information of winter wheat in the three treatment areas.

[0009] (4) Based on the occurrence of agricultural meteorological disasters in the test year, non-response areas for agricultural meteorological disasters in that year are set up in the partial response areas for comparative observation with the prevention and control areas in the partial response areas.

[0010] (5) Record and compare the ear dry weight, stem dry weight, leaf dry weight of winter wheat at the heading stage and the dry matter (ear dry weight, stem dry weight, leaf dry weight), number of grains per ear, and thousand-grain weight of winter wheat at the filling stage in the three treatment areas.

[0011] (6) Determine the yield benefit difference per unit area Y by the following formula: C : , Where Y C Refers to the difference in crop yield between the full response treatment and the partial response treatment; Y1 refers to the crop yield per unit area in the full response treatment; Y2 refers to the crop yield per unit area in the partial response treatment.

[0012] (7) The maximum difference in yield benefit per unit area Y is determined by the following formula: max : , Where Y max It refers to the maximum difference in crop yield between the full response treatment and the non-response treatment; Y3 refers to the yield per unit area of ​​crops in the non-response treatment.

[0013] (8) Determine the market value C of the crop per unit area.

[0014] (9) The cost per unit area H is determined by the following formula: , In the formula, H i Refers to the total cost of production materials invested in field management of crop growth this year; M1, M2, M3...M n Represents the cost of different management methods and means of production in this year's winter wheat production; j=1, 2...n, n is the sum of all management methods and types of means of production in this year's winter wheat production under each treatment; i=1 indicates a full response treatment, i=2 indicates a partial response treatment, and i=3 indicates a non-response treatment.

[0015] (10) The economic benefit difference per unit area W is determined by the following formula: c : , Where W cIt refers to the difference in economic benefits of crop yield per unit area between the full response treatment and the partial response treatment; C1 refers to the market value of crop per unit area under the full response treatment; H1 refers to the total cost of production materials invested under the full response treatment; C2 refers to the market value of crop per unit area under the partial response treatment; H2 refers to the total cost of production materials invested under the partial response treatment.

[0016] (11) The maximum difference in economic benefits per unit area, W, is determined by the following formula: max : , Where W max It refers to the maximum difference in economic benefits per unit area between the full response treatment and the non-response treatment; C3 refers to the market value of crops per unit area under the non-response treatment; H3 refers to the total cost of production materials under the non-response treatment.

[0017] In some embodiments of the present disclosure, in step (1), the full response area is to respond in time according to the meteorological warning and take agricultural management measures, the partial response area is to respond according to the conventional management methods of surrounding farmers, and the non-response area is to not take any response measures.

[0018] In some embodiments of the present disclosure, in step (3), the field management information includes sowing time, harvesting time, variety, farming method, irrigation date, irrigation water volume, weeding and spraying time, and related agricultural materials and management input costs.

[0019] In some embodiments of the present disclosure, in step (8), the market value C of crops per acre is calculated by the following formula: , In the formula, C i Refers to the market value of crop yield per mu under different response treatments; Y i Refers to the crop yield per mu under different response treatments; P refers to the local market price of winter wheat in that year; i=1 indicates a full response treatment, i=2 indicates a partial response treatment, and i=3 indicates no response treatment.

[0020] In some embodiments of the present disclosure, in step (4), the agricultural meteorological disasters include ergot and / or dry hot winds.

[0021] One or more technical solutions provided in the embodiments of the present application have at least any of the following technical effects or advantages: 1. The survey results at the heading stage showed that the dry weight of ears, stems and leaves in the full response treatment was better than that in the non-response treatment; the survey results at the filling stage showed that the dry weight of ears, leaves and number of grains per ear showed an overall trend that the full response treatment was greater than the partial response treatment and greater than the non-response treatment.

[0022] 2. This invention application quantitatively studies the impact of different agricultural meteorological service information on winter wheat yield by setting up a gradient test of the degree of response to agricultural meteorological service information. It processes and analyzes data based on scientific principles and statistical methods, reduces the interference of subjective judgment, improves the accuracy and reliability of evaluation results, clarifies the benefits of agricultural meteorological service information in agricultural production, plays an important guiding role in further improving crop yields, and provides a solid data foundation for further research and model development.

[0023] 3. This application is based on the evaluation method of field experiments. Since it needs to be carried out in a real field environment, and the meteorological disasters and their extent encountered in the growing season in the field environment are uncontrollable, the results are objective.

[0024] 4. The quantitative evaluation method of meteorological service benefits for winter wheat in this application covers the entire growth cycle of winter wheat from sowing to harvesting. The comprehensive evaluation takes into account the impact of agricultural meteorological services at multiple levels, including crop yield and economic benefits, ensuring that the evaluation results can objectively reflect the meteorological impacts at various stages of crop growth. It can comprehensively measure the actual benefits of meteorological services, including not only direct agricultural production benefits, but also indirect impacts on farmers' livelihoods, agricultural sustainable development and food safety, making the evaluation results comprehensive.

[0025] 5. The quantitative evaluation method of winter wheat meteorological service benefits in this application pays special attention to the key periods of winter wheat growth - heading and grain filling. These two periods are extremely sensitive to meteorological conditions, and any adverse climatic factors may have a significant impact on the final yield. Through targeted investigation and analysis, this application can more accurately identify and quantify the specific impact of meteorological conditions on crop growth, thereby providing a scientific basis for formulating effective agricultural management strategies. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0026] Figure 1 This is a comparison chart of the experimental plots of dry hot wind control and non-control in one embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0027] In order to better understand the technical solution of the present application, the above technical solution will be described in detail below in conjunction with the drawings and specific embodiments of the specification. However, the following embodiments are only used to illustrate the present application in detail and do not limit the scope of the present application in any way.

[0028] Example 1: Experimental design and agricultural meteorological service information response This case was tested in the field of the core area of ​​high-standard farmland in Shizhai Town, Yuanyang County, Xinxiang City, Henan Province from October 2023 to May 2024 (35°06′N, 113°84′E). The test site is located in the warm temperate continental monsoon climate, with an average annual temperature of 14.9℃ and an average annual precipitation of 763.4 mm. The test set up three treatments: full response area, partial response area and non-response area, with 3 replicates for each treatment, and the test land area was about 10.0 mu. The full response area means that each agricultural meteorological warning signal and important agricultural advice will be responded to in a timely manner, and agricultural management measures will be taken; the partial response area means that daily management is carried out according to the management method of surrounding farmers, mainly considering the surrounding farmers. Often not all agricultural meteorological warning signals and important agricultural advice are responded to, and only some meteorological services will be responded to; the non-response area means that all agricultural meteorological services are not responded to.

[0029] The experimental winter wheat variety is "Chacha 168", which is a popular local variety. The sowing period of winter wheat is October 25, 2023, and the harvest period is May 31, 2024. According to the different growth stages of winter wheat, this case conducts a sampling survey on the response degree of agricultural meteorological service information, and records information such as winter wheat field management, mainly including sowing time, harvest time, variety, farming method, irrigation date, irrigation water volume, weeding and spraying time, and related agricultural materials, management input costs, etc.

[0030] The overall light and heat resources and soil moisture during the growing season of winter wheat in the experimental field were sufficient. In response to the adverse meteorological conditions in the late growth period, since the wheat sowing in 2023, the experimental field has carried out two irrigations (greening period and jointing period), ergot disease prevention and control (heading period) and dry hot wind prevention and control (filling period) for comparative treatment based on the meteorological service reminders and early warning information releases for agriculture.

[0031] According to the agricultural recommendations of the "Henan Province Agricultural Meteorological Weekly Report on March 3, 2024", the fully responded area was sprayed on March 4, 2024 (greening period), the partially responded area was flooded on March 5, 2024 (greening period), and the non-response area was not irrigated.

[0032] According to the agricultural recommendations of the "Henan Province Agricultural Meteorological Weekly Report on March 31, 2024", the fully responded area was sprayed on April 1, 2024 (jointing stage), the partially responded area was flooded on April 2, 2024 (jointing stage), and the non-response area was not irrigated.

[0033] According to meteorological conditions, there will be a lot of precipitation during the heading and flowering period of winter wheat in mid-to-late April 2024, and the appropriate temperature and high humidity will be suitable for the infection and epidemic of Fusarium head blight. On April 2, 2024, the Henan Provincial Meteorological Bureau and the Henan Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs issued a high-risk warning information for winter wheat Fusarium head blight. The test site is a medium-risk area for the occurrence of Fusarium head blight. Both the full response treatment and the partial response treatment took measures to prevent and control Fusarium head blight on April 15, 2024 according to the warning information, that is, 43% tebuconazole 20-30 grams / mu + 70% imidacloprid wettable powder 5-10 grams / mu + 0.4% Vidali 10 grams / mu were applied, and drones were used for aerial defense, with a water consumption of no less than 4 kilograms per mu, a flight altitude of no more than 1.5 meters from the wheat tip, a flight speed of no more than 3 meters per second, and a spray width of no more than 3 meters; no response treatment did not take any prevention and control measures.

[0034] According to the analysis and forecast of meteorological conditions, three dry hot wind processes will occur in some parts of Henan Province on May 14, 17-18, and 23-24. On May 9, 2024, the Henan Provincial Meteorological Bureau and the Henan Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs issued a high-risk warning for dry hot wind disasters in the province. The test site is a medium- and high-risk area for dry hot wind disasters. Both the full response treatment and the partial response treatment adopted the "one spray and three preventions" prevention and control of dry hot winds on May 11, 2024 according to the warning information, that is, applying 20-30 ml of 10% hexaconazole suspension + 30 ml of 30% imidacloprid + 80-100 grams of 98% potassium dihydrogen phosphate, and conducting drone flight prevention. The water consumption per mu is not less than 1.2 kg, the flight height is no more than 1.5 meters from the wheat tip, the flight speed is no more than 3 meters per second, and the spray width is no more than 3 meters; no response treatment did not take prevention and control measures.

[0035] Example 2: Evaluation of the benefits of different agricultural meteorological disaster risk warning information This example is based on the test conditions of Example 1. 100 m is reserved for each plot in the response area of ​​the test site. 2 No control of ergot and dry hot winds was carried out, but comparison was made with control plots in some response areas to quantitatively evaluate the effectiveness of different agricultural meteorological disaster risk warning information.

[0036] Evaluation method of meteorological service benefits for fusarium head blight control: 10 points were randomly selected in the plots that responded to and did not respond to fusarium head blight control, 100 ears were selected at each point, and the number of ears with fusarium head blight was recorded. Evaluation method of meteorological service benefits for dry hot wind control: 20 ears of the same size were selected in the plots that responded to and did not respond to dry hot wind control to measure the filling rate, a total of 40 ears, and the grain moisture content, thousand-grain weight and filling rate were calculated.

[0037] According to meteorological forecasts, there will be a lot of precipitation during the heading and flowering period of winter wheat in mid-to-late April 2024, and the appropriate temperature and high humidity will be suitable for the infection and spread of fusarium head blight. A high-risk warning for winter wheat head blight was issued on April 2, 2024, and the test site was a medium-risk area for the occurrence and spread of head blight. Both the full response treatment and the partial response treatment took measures to prevent and control head blight on April 15, 2024 based on the warning information, and the non-response treatment did not take any prevention and control measures.

[0038] According to the analysis and forecast of meteorological conditions, three dry hot wind processes will occur in some areas of Henan Province on May 14, 17-18, and 23-24. On May 9, 2024, the Henan Provincial Meteorological Bureau and the Henan Provincial Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs issued a high-risk warning for dry hot wind disasters in the province. The test site was a medium- and high-risk area for dry hot wind disasters. Both the full response and partial response measures adopted the "one spray and three preventions" prevention and control of dry hot winds on May 11, 2024 based on the warning information, and the non-response measures did not take any prevention and control measures.

[0039] In order to better evaluate the meteorological service benefits of fusarium head blight and hot and dry wind, this case conducted two groups of supplementary field tests on the prevention and control benefits of fusarium head blight and hot and dry wind. On May 7-8, 2024, the Henan Meteorological Science Institute organized business backbones to go to 20 points across the province to go deep into the fields, randomly selected fusarium head blight control response and non-response plots, and conducted a survey on the occurrence of fusarium head blight in winter wheat. For the plots where hot and dry wind control was not carried out at the Xinxiang Agricultural Meteorological Experiment Station, the observation data of the filling rate and thousand-grain weight of winter wheat during the entire filling period were analyzed.

[0040] On May 16, the control response of Fusarium fusarium in the partial response treatment of the experimental site and the reserved 100 m 2 The survey of the unresponsive plots found that the average diseased ear rate in the Fusarium smut control plots was 1.5% lower than that in the uncontrolled plots. At the same time, according to the results of the random field survey in central and southern Henan from May 7 to 8, due to the influence of the precipitation process during the heading and flowering period, some areas in southern and central Henan suffered mild diseases, mainly stem base rot and Fusarium smut, etc. The Fusarium smut diseased ear rate in the controlled plots in southern Henan was 2.4% lower than that in the uncontrolled plots, and the Fusarium smut diseased ear rate in the controlled plots in central Henan was 1.0% lower than that in the uncontrolled plots, and the average reduction in the province was 1.8%.

[0041] For the evaluation of the effectiveness of the dry hot wind risk warning, the subsequent response to the dry hot wind prevention and control in the partial response treatment of the test site and the reserved 100m 2 The survey of the non-response plots found that the thousand-grain weight of the dry hot wind control plots increased by 1.4 g compared with the non-control plots; the yield per mu increased by about 29.49 kg, the filling rate increased by 0.12 g / day, and the grain moisture content increased by 6.0% (Table 1, Figure 1). According to the dry hot wind evaluation standard, Xinxiang experienced mild dry hot wind weather from May 22 to 23. Analysis of the continuous observation records of the unprotected plots of the Xinxiang Agricultural Meteorological Experimental Station found that the thousand-grain weight of the unprotected plots dropped from 46.1 g on May 22 to 40.2 g on May 24. The final thousand-grain weight was also 1.7 g lower than in 2022 (a normal year).

[0042] Table 1 Comparison of main growth factors between the plots with dry hot wind control and those without control in the experimental plots .

[0043] Example 3: Response of key growth periods to agricultural meteorological service information 1. Response of agricultural meteorological service information during heading period The winter wheat in the experimental field entered the heading stage on April 15, 2024. In this case, a field survey of the experimental field was conducted on the heading stage on April 18. The results showed that the dry weight of the ear in the full response, partial response and non-response treatments was 2.73, 1.36 and 1.77 g, respectively. Among them, the full response treatment was significantly higher than the partial response treatment ( P <0.05) was 1.37 g higher, and the response was 0.96 g higher than that of the non-responders, but it was not significant ( P >0.05); the dry weight of the ear in the partial response treatment was 0.41 g lower than that in the non-response treatment, but it was not significant ( P >0.05). The stem weights of the full response, partial response and non-response treatments were 6.57, 4.39 and 4.60 g, respectively. The full response treatment was significantly higher than the partial response treatment ( P <0.05) was 2.18 g higher, which was significantly lower than the non-responsive one ( P <0.05) was 1.97 g higher; while the dry weight of the ear in the partial response treatment was 0.21 g lower than that in the non-response treatment, but it was not significant ( P >0.05). The leaf dry weights of the full response, partial response and non-response treatments were 2.74, 1.93 and 2.25 g, respectively. The full response treatment was significantly higher than the partial response treatment ( P <0.05) was 0.81 g higher, and the lower response was 0.49 g higher, but not significant ( P >0.05); the leaf dry weight of the partial response treatment was 0.32 g lower than that of the non-response treatment, but it was not significant ( P >0.05). Overall, the dry weights of ears, stems and leaves in the full response treatment were better than those in the non-response treatment, while those in the partial response treatment were lower than those in the non-response treatment.

[0044] Table 2 Main growth factors of winter wheat at heading stage Note: The same letters in different treatments are not significantly different. Different capital letters indicate significant differences at the 0.01 level. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences at the 0.05 level.

[0045] 2. Response of agricultural meteorological service information during the grain filling period Winter wheat in the experimental field entered the grain filling stage on May 2, 2024, and a field survey of the experimental field was conducted on May 22. The results showed that the dry weight of the ear in the full response, partial response and non-response treatments were 21.34, 17.94 and 15.13 g, respectively. The full response treatment was significantly higher than the partial response treatment ( P <0.05) was 3.40g higher, significantly less responsive ( P <0.05) was 6.21 g higher; while the dry weight of the ear in the partial response treatment was significantly higher than that in the non-response treatment ( P <0.05) was 2.81 g higher. The stem weights of the full response, partial response and non-response treatments were 7.02, 5.59 and 6.66 g, respectively. The full response treatment was 1.43 g higher than the partial response treatment and 0.36 g higher than the non-response treatment, while the partial response treatment was 1.07 g lower than the non-response treatment. However, there were no significant differences among the treatments ( P >0.05). The leaf dry weights of the full response, partial response and non-response treatments were 2.15, 1.89 and 1.39 g, respectively. The full response treatment was 0.26 g higher than the partial response treatment, but not significantly higher ( P >0.05, significantly less responsive ( P <0.05) was 0.76 g higher; the partial response treatment was significantly higher than the non-response treatment by 0.50 g ( P <0.05). The number of grains per ear in the full response, partial response and non-response treatments were 41.93, 38.77 and 32.57, respectively. The full response treatment had 3.16 more grains than the partial response treatment, but it was not significant ( P >0.05, and 9.36 more than those who did not respond ( P <0.05); the number of grains per ear in the partial response treatment was significantly higher than that in the non-response treatment by 6.20 ( P <0.05). The thousand-grain weights of the full response, partial response, and no response treatments were 39.81, 37.79, and 39.05 g, respectively. The full response treatment was 2.02 g higher than the partial response treatment and 0.76 g higher than the no response treatment, while the partial response treatment was 1.26 g lower than the no response treatment. However, there were no significant differences among the treatments ( P>0.05). In summary, the dry weight of ear, leaf and number of grains per ear showed a trend that the complete response treatment was greater than the partial response treatment and greater than the non-response treatment, while the stem dry weight and 1000-grain weight of the partial response treatment were lower than the non-response treatment, but the differences among the treatments were not significant.

[0046] Table 3 Main growth factors of winter wheat during grain filling period Note: The same letters in different treatments are not significantly different. Different capital letters indicate significant differences at the 0.01 level. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences at the 0.05 level.

[0047] Example 4: Comprehensive Benefit Evaluation of Agricultural Meteorological Services This example uses the following agricultural meteorological service benefit evaluation model to evaluate the yield benefit and comprehensive benefit of agricultural meteorological service information: 1. Calculation method of yield benefit of agricultural meteorological service information: (1) Yield benefit difference per mu (Y C ) , Where Y C Refers to the difference in crop yield between the full response treatment and the partial response treatment, kg / mu; Y1 refers to the crop yield per mu in the full response treatment, kg / mu; Y2 refers to the crop yield per mu in the partial response treatment, kg / mu.

[0048] (2) Maximum difference in yield benefit per mu (Y max ) , Where Y max It refers to the maximum difference in crop yield between the full response treatment and the non-response treatment, kg / mu; Y3 refers to the crop yield of the non-response treatment, kg / mu.

[0049] 2. Calculation method of comprehensive economic benefits generated by agricultural meteorological services (1) Market value of crops per acre (C) , In the formula, C i Refers to the market value of crop yield per mu under different response treatments, RMB / mu; Y i Refers to the crop yield per mu under different response treatments, kg / mu; P refers to the local market price of winter wheat in that year, yuan / kg. When i=1, it means full response treatment, when i=2, it means partial response treatment, and when i=3, it means no response treatment.

[0050] (2) Input cost per mu (H) , In the formula, H i Refers to the total cost of production materials invested in field management of crop growth this year, RMB / mu; M1, M2, M3...M n It represents the cost (yuan / mu) of different management methods and production materials in winter wheat production this year, including rotary tillage, wheat seeds, fertilizers, different meteorological warning response and prevention costs, etc. j=1, 2...n, n is the sum of all management methods and production materials types of winter wheat production this year under each treatment. i=1 indicates a full response treatment, i=2 indicates a partial response treatment, and i=3 indicates a non-response treatment.

[0051] (3) Economic benefit difference per mu of yield (W c ) , Where W c Refers to the difference in economic benefits of crop yield per mu between full response treatment and partial response treatment, RMB / mu; C1 refers to the market value of crop per mu under full response treatment, RMB / mu; H1 refers to the total cost of production materials under full response treatment, RMB / mu. C2 refers to the market value of crop per mu under partial response treatment, RMB / mu; H2 refers to the total cost of production materials under partial response treatment, RMB / mu.

[0052] (4) Maximum difference in economic benefits per mu of yield (W max ) , Where W max Refers to the maximum difference in economic benefits per mu between the full response treatment and the non-response treatment, Yuan / mu; C3 refers to the market value of crops per mu under the non-response treatment, Yuan / mu; H3 refers to the total cost of production materials under the non-response treatment, Yuan / mu.

[0053] Winter wheat in the experimental field was harvested and sampled for yield measurement on May 31, 2024. The results showed that the yields of the full response, partial response and non-response treatments were 520,100, 504,500 and 551,400 stems / mu, respectively. The full response treatment was 15,600 stems / mu higher than the partial response treatment and 31,300 stems / mu lower than the non-response treatment; the partial response treatment was 46,900 stems / mu lower than the non-response treatment, but the differences among the treatments were not significant ( P >0.05). The number of grains per ear in the full response, partial response and non-response treatments were 40.50, 36.40 and 34.53, respectively. The full response treatment was 4.10 higher than the partial response treatment and 5.97 higher than the non-response treatment; the partial response treatment was 1.87 higher than the non-response treatment, but the differences among the treatments were not significant ( P>0.05). The thousand-grain weights of the full response, partial response, and non-response treatments were 39.86, 41.34, and 37.54 g, respectively. The full response treatment was 1.48 g lower than the partial response treatment, but neither was significant ( P >0.05), and was significantly higher by 2.32 g than the non-response treatment ( P <0.05); the thousand-grain weight of the partial response treatment was significantly higher than that of the non-response treatment by 3.89 g ( P <0.05). The yield per mu in the full response, partial response and non-response treatments were 702.70, 658.26 and 548.65 kg, respectively. The full response treatment was 44.4 kg higher than the partial response treatment, but not significantly higher ( P >0.05, and was significantly higher by 154.05 kg than the non-response treatment ( P <0.05); the yield per mu of the partial response treatment was significantly higher than that of the non-response treatment by 109.61 kg ( P <0.05). The annual production costs of the full response, partial response and no response treatments were 604 yuan (H1), 610 yuan (H2) and 530 yuan (H3), respectively. The per-mu income was calculated based on the local winter wheat market purchase price of 1.2 yuan, and the per-mu income was 1686.5 yuan (C1), 1579.8 yuan (C2) and 1316.8 yuan (C3), respectively. The per-mu income minus the per-mu cost gave a net income of 1082.5 yuan, 969.8 yuan and 786.8 yuan, respectively. The net income of the full response treatment increased by 112.7 yuan per mu compared with the partial response treatment (W c ), but not significantly ( P >0.05), and the income per mu increased significantly by 295.7 yuan (W max )( P <0.05); the partial response treatment significantly increased the income by 183.1 yuan per mu compared with the non-response treatment ( P <0.05). In summary, the full response treatment can increase the yield by 44.44 kg per mu and increase the income by 112.7 yuan compared with the partial response treatment, but the difference is not significant. The full response treatment can increase the yield by 154.05 kg per mu and increase the income by 295.7 yuan compared with the non-response treatment, both of which are significantly different ( P <0.05); the partial response treatment can increase the yield by 109.61 kg per mu and the income by 183.1 yuan per mu compared with the non-response treatment, both of which are significantly different ( P <0.05).

[0054] Table 4 Main growth factors of winter wheat during harvest period Note: The same letters in different treatments are not significantly different. Different capital letters indicate significant differences at the 0.01 level. Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences at the 0.05 level.

[0055] Table 5 Cost-benefit table of various management and inputs in the experimental field since wheat sowing in 2023-2024 Note: 1. Management measures and costs during the sowing period are rotary tillage (60 yuan / mu), machine sowing (25 yuan / mu), wheat seeds (60 yuan / mu), and chemical fertilizers (including organic fertilizers) (260 yuan / mu); 2. Management measures and costs during the greening period are sprinkler irrigation (12 yuan / mu) for full response treatment, flood irrigation (15 yuan / mu) for partial response treatment, and field weeding (25 yuan / mu); 3. Management measures and costs during the jointing period are sprinkler irrigation (12 yuan / mu) for full response treatment, and flood irrigation (15 yuan / mu) for partial response treatment; 4. Management measures and costs during the heading period are medication for ergot prevention and control and use of drones (25 yuan / mu); 5. Management measures and costs during the grain filling period are medication for dry hot wind prevention and control and use of drones (25 yuan / mu); 6. Management measures and costs during the harvest period are machine harvesting (80 yuan / mu) and agricultural three-wheeled wheat transportation (20 yuan / mu).

[0056] Although some preferred embodiments of the present invention have been described, those skilled in the art may make other changes and modifications to these embodiments once they have learned the basic creative concept. Therefore, the appended claims are intended to be interpreted as including the preferred embodiments and all changes and modifications that fall within the scope of the present invention.

[0057] Obviously, those skilled in the art can make various changes and modifications to the present invention without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. Thus, if these modifications and variations of the present invention fall within the scope of the claims of this application and their equivalents, the present invention is also intended to include these modifications and variations.

Claims

1. A quantitative evaluation method for winter wheat meteorological service benefits based on field experiments, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: (1) Three treatment areas, namely, complete response area, partial response area and non-response area, were set up in the field test area to be evaluated; (2) Respond to agricultural meteorological warning signals and farming advice for each treatment area; (3) Record field management according to the growth period of winter wheat and collect field management information of winter wheat in the three treatment areas; (4) According to the occurrence of agricultural meteorological disasters in the test year, plots of non-response areas for agricultural meteorological disasters in that year are set up in the partial response areas, and comparative observations are carried out with the prevention and control plots in the partial response areas; (5) Record the ear dry weight, stem dry weight, leaf dry weight of winter wheat at the heading stage and the dry matter weight, number of grains per ear, and thousand-grain weight of winter wheat at the grain filling stage in the three treatment areas; (6) Determine the yield benefit difference per unit area Y by the following formula: C : ， Where Y C Refers to the difference in crop yield between the full response treatment and the partial response treatment; Y1 refers to the crop yield per unit area in the full response treatment; Y2 refers to the crop yield per unit area in the partial response treatment; (7) The maximum difference in yield benefit per unit area Y is determined by the following formula: max : ， Where Y max It refers to the maximum difference in crop yield between the full response treatment and the non-response treatment; Y3 refers to the crop yield per unit area of ​​the non-response treatment; (8) Determine the market value C per unit area of ​​crops; (9) The cost per unit area H is determined by the following formula: ， In the formula, H i Refers to the total cost of production materials invested in field management of crop growth this year; M1, M2, M3...M n Indicates the cost of different management methods and production materials in winter wheat production this year; j = 1, 2...n, n is the sum of all management methods and types of production materials for winter wheat production this year under each treatment; i = 1 indicates a full response treatment, i = 2 indicates a partial response treatment, and i = 3 indicates a non-response treatment; (10) The economic benefit difference per unit area W is determined by the following formula: c : ， Where W c Refers to the difference in economic benefits of crop yield per unit area between the full response treatment and the partial response treatment; C1 refers to the market value of crop per unit area under the full response treatment; H1 refers to the total cost of production materials invested under the full response treatment; C2 refers to the market value of crop per unit area under the partial response treatment; H2 refers to the total cost of production materials invested under the partial response treatment; (11) The maximum difference in economic benefits per unit area, W, is determined by the following formula: max : ， Where W max It refers to the maximum difference in economic benefits per unit area between the full response treatment and the non-response treatment; C3 refers to the market value of crops per unit area under the non-response treatment; H3 refers to the total cost of production materials under the non-response treatment.

2. The method for quantitatively evaluating the benefits of winter wheat meteorological services according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step (8), the market value C per unit area of ​​crops is calculated by the following formula: ， In the formula, C i Refers to the market value of crop yield per unit area under different response treatments; Y i Refers to the crop yield per unit area under different response treatments; P refers to the market price of local winter wheat in that year; i = 1 indicates a full response treatment, i = 2 indicates a partial response treatment, and i = 3 indicates a non-response treatment.

3. The method for quantitatively evaluating the benefits of winter wheat meteorological services according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step (3), the field management information includes sowing time, harvesting time, variety, tillage method, irrigation date, irrigation water volume, weeding and spraying time, and related agricultural materials and management input costs.

4. The method for quantitatively evaluating the benefits of winter wheat meteorological services according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step (5), the dry matter weight of winter wheat at the grain filling stage includes ear dry weight, stem dry weight, and leaf dry weight.

5. The method for quantitatively evaluating the benefits of winter wheat meteorological services according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step (4), the agricultural meteorological disasters include fusarium head blight and / or dry hot winds.

6. The method for quantitatively evaluating the benefits of winter wheat meteorological services according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In step (1), the fully responded area is to respond in time according to the meteorological warning and take agricultural management measures, the partially responded area is to respond according to the conventional management methods of surrounding farmers, and the non-response area is to not take any response measures.

Images