Impacts of Sandbag Barrier on Sand Flow and Vegetation Restoration on Mobile Dunes
|更新时间:2025-03-12
|
Impacts of Sandbag Barrier on Sand Flow and Vegetation Restoration on Mobile Dunes
Bulletin of Soiland Water ConservationVol. 33, Issue 1, Pages: 46-50(2014)
作者机构:
1. 内蒙古农业大学生态环境学院,内蒙古,呼和浩特,010018
2. 内蒙古自治区林业科学研究院,内蒙古,呼和浩特,010010
3. 内蒙古自治区环境工程评估中心,内蒙古,呼和浩特,010011
4. 内蒙古兴安盟气象局, 内蒙古乌兰浩特,137400
作者简介:
基金信息:
DOI:
CLC:
Published:2014
稿件说明:
移动端阅览
YUAN Li-min, GAO Yong, WANG Ji, et al. Impacts of Sandbag Barrier on Sand Flow and Vegetation Restoration on Mobile Dunes[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2014, 33(1): 46-50.
DOI:
YUAN Li-min, GAO Yong, WANG Ji, et al. Impacts of Sandbag Barrier on Sand Flow and Vegetation Restoration on Mobile Dunes[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2014, 33(1): 46-50.DOI:
Impacts of Sandbag Barrier on Sand Flow and Vegetation Restoration on Mobile Dunes
In order to understand the sandbag barrier's influence on sand flow and vegetation
wind speed
plant species
density
height and coverage were investigated through the ways of field testing and sampling. Transported sediment samples in 0-30 cm layer were collected and windbreak efficiency
surface roughness
transport rate and vegetation in 1 m×1 m
2 m×2 m
3 m×3 m sandbag barriers were studied. Results showed that sandbag barrier can improve wind efficiency and increase surface roughness effectively and meanwhile
wind efficiency and surface roughness were decreased with the sandbag barrier size increasing. Sandbag barrier sizes of 1 m×1 m
2 m×2 m
3 m×3 m had the different surface roughness values of 5.79
2.38 and 2.12 cm that were 91.31%
78.88% and 76.26% higher than CK
respectively. Sandbag barrier could effectively reduce sediment discharge which made sediment transport rate in every layer of 0-30 cm smaller than that of CK significantly. Compared with sediment transport rates for the three sandbag barrier sizes
the order was:1 m×1 m> 2 m×2 m> 3 m×3 m. After sandbag barriers were laid for 1 year
plant species of sandbag barrier was one more than that of CK
and the average height
density and coverage were 91.5%
71.1% and 125.4% higher than that of CK. The average height
density and coverage of vegetation were increased with the sandbag barrier size increasing.