1. 中国科学院 山地灾害与地表过程重点实验室,四川,成都,610041
2. 中国科学院 水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所,四川,成都,610041
3. 中国科学院大学,北京,100049
4. 四川农业大学 农学院,四川,成都,611130
5. 四川省电力设计院 环保所,四川,成都,610072
纸质出版:2015
移动端阅览
郑学用, 熊东红, 张素, 等. 干热河谷冲沟发育区不同层位土体抗冲性研究[J]. 水土保持通报, 2015,35(6):101-105.
ZHENG Xueyong, XIONG Donghong, ZHANG Su, et al. Soil Anti-scourability of Different Horizons in Gully Developed Area of Dry-hot Valley Region[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2015, 35(6): 101-105.
郑学用, 熊东红, 张素, 等. 干热河谷冲沟发育区不同层位土体抗冲性研究[J]. 水土保持通报, 2015,35(6):101-105. DOI: 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2015.06.017.
ZHENG Xueyong, XIONG Donghong, ZHANG Su, et al. Soil Anti-scourability of Different Horizons in Gully Developed Area of Dry-hot Valley Region[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2015, 35(6): 101-105. DOI: 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2015.06.017.
[目的] 对干热河谷冲沟发育区不同层位土体抗冲性进行比较研究
为冲沟侵蚀治理措施制定提供科学依据。[方法] 通过原状土槽冲刷法进行试验研究。[结果] (1)各层土体抗冲性均随冲刷时间呈幂函数增大(除第Ⅳ
Ⅴ层土体因裂隙的存在而在冲刷前期表现为抗冲性能随冲刷时间呈线性增加外);(2)不同层位土体初始抗冲性差异显著
依次为:Ⅰ层 >Ⅱ层 >Ⅵ层 >Ⅲ层
Ⅳ层>Ⅴ层。[结论] 研究区各层位土体抗冲性在存在差异
总体上表现为随土层深度的增加呈旋回式减小。
[Objective] The anti-scourabilities of soils from different horizons in gully developed area of dry-hot valley region were compared in order to provide a scientific basis for gully erosion control.[Methods] Undisturbed soil sampled from six different horizons were eroded with scour trough in laboratory.[Results] (1) Except layers of Ⅳ and Ⅴ
the soil anti-scourability of other horizons increased in a power function with the scouring time. Resulted from the existence of fissure
the two layers exhibited a linear function at the scouring earlier stage.(2) There were significant differences in soil anti-scourability among each horizon with ranks as:layer Ⅰ >layer Ⅱ >layer Ⅵ >layer Ⅲ
layer Ⅳ>layer Ⅴ.[Conclusion] Soil anti-scourability decreased with the depth of each horizon in a gyratory way with ranks of layer Ⅰ >layer Ⅱ >layer Ⅲ
and layer Ⅳ >layer Ⅴ >layer Ⅵ.
Dong Yifan, Xiong Donghong, Su Zhengan, et al. Critical topographic threshold of gully erosion in Yuanmou Dry-hot Valley in Southwestern China[J]. Physical Geography, 2013, 34(1):50-59.
Su Zhengan, Zhang Jianhui, Xiong Donghong, et al. Assessment of soil erosion by compensatory hoeing tillage in a purple soil[J]. Journal of Mountain Science, 2012, 9(1):59-66.
熊东红,杨丹,李佳佳,等.元谋干热河谷区退化坡地土壤裂缝形态发育的影响因子[J].农业工程学报,2013,1(1):102-108.
康超,谌文武,崔凯,等.西夏王陵4号陵冲沟发育过程、特征及其影响因素[J].敦煌研究,2009(6):71-74.
Oliveira M A T D. Slope geometry and gully erosion development:Bananal, Săo Paulo, Brazil[J]. Zeitschrift Für Geomorphologie, 1990,34(4):423-434.
Poesen J W A, Hooke J M. Erosion, flooding and channel management in Mediterranean environments of southern Europe[J]. Progress in Physical Geography, 1997, 21(2):157-199.
Cerdan O, Bissonnais Y L, Couturier A, et al. Rill erosion on cultivated hillslopes during two extreme rainfall events in Normandy, France[J]. Soil & Tillage Research, 2002, 67(2):99-108.
钱方,凌小惠.元谋土林成因及类型的初步研究[J].中国科学:化学生命科学地学,1989,4(4):412-418.
朱显谟,雷文进,刘朝端,等.甘肃中部土壤侵蚀调查报告[J].土壤专报,1958(32):53-109.
柴宗新,范建容,刘淑珍.金沙江下游元谋盆地冲沟发育特征和过程分析[J].地理科学,2001,21(4):339-343.
杨丹,熊东红,翟娟,等.元谋干热河谷冲沟形态特征及其成因[J].中国水土保持科学,2012,1(1):38-45.
蒋定生.黄土高原水土流失与治理模式[M].北京:中国水利水电出版社,1997.
蒋定生.黄土区不同利用类型土壤抗冲刷能力的研究[J].土壤通报,1979(4):20-29.
0
浏览量
1293
下载量
0
CSCD
关联资源
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
京公网安备11010802024621