漓江风景区土壤生态环境对旅游干扰的响应

杨东伟; 杨永德; 陆丹丹; 史慧珂

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2020.05.004

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

漓江风景区土壤生态环境对旅游干扰的响应

试验研究

- 漓江风景区土壤生态环境对旅游干扰的响应
- Response of Soil Ecological Environment to Tourist Disturbance in Lijiang Scenic Area
- 水土保持通报 2020年40卷第5期页码：21-26
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 海南热带海洋学院旅游学院,海南,三亚,572000
  2. 广西大学商学院,广西,南宁,530004
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目“过氧化氢与一氧化氮互作对桉树耐铝性的调控作用及其机理”（31800530）;广西博士后专项（Y201002050）;2020年度海南热带海洋学院科研启动资助项目
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2020.05.004
  中图分类号： F592.99;S158
- 纸质出版：2020
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
杨东伟, 杨永德, 陆丹丹, 等. 漓江风景区土壤生态环境对旅游干扰的响应[J]. 水土保持通报, 2020,40(5):21-26.

Yang Dongwei, Yang Yongde, Lu Dandan, et al. Response of Soil Ecological Environment to Tourist Disturbance in Lijiang Scenic Area[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2020, 40(5): 21-26.
杨东伟, 杨永德, 陆丹丹, 等. 漓江风景区土壤生态环境对旅游干扰的响应[J]. 水土保持通报, 2020,40(5):21-26. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2020.05.004.

Yang Dongwei, Yang Yongde, Lu Dandan, et al. Response of Soil Ecological Environment to Tourist Disturbance in Lijiang Scenic Area[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2020, 40(5): 21-26. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2020.05.004.

摘要

[目的] 探索广西壮族自治区桂林市漓江风景区土壤生态环境因子对旅游干扰的响应规律，为合理开发与保护漓江风景区旅游资源提供科学依据。[方法] 采用野外调查和室内分析方法，对比不同干扰程度下漓江风景区土壤环境指标的差异，分析旅游干扰对漓江风景区土壤生态环境的影响。[结果] 在旅游活动干扰下，土壤硬度明显增加，5个系列土壤坚实度平均值增加15.55倍，土壤颜色的明度和彩度增加，容重平均增幅为33.43%；枯枝落叶层厚度和土壤自然含水率下降，土壤有机质、土壤全氮、碱解氮、有效磷以及有效钾含量平均降幅分别达到61.31%，61.58%，32.21%，72.08%和36.26%。[结论] 在旅游干扰下漓江风景区土壤生态环境发生阶段性变化，供试区土壤出现不同程度退化，土壤综合肥力下降，土壤结构变差，进而将对景区植被和景观带来影响，因而应从管理和技术等方面采取有效措施，以减弱旅游干扰对漓江风景区土壤生态环境的负面影响。

Abstract

[Objective] The response of soil ecological environment to interference by tourism was explored in Lijiang scenic area of Guilin City in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region to provide a scientific basis for the rational development and protection of tourism resources.[Methods] A field investigation and laboratory analysis were conducted to analyze the differences of soil environmental indicators in the Lijiang scenic area under different interference levels

and the impact of interference due to tourism on the soil ecological environment in the study area.[Results] The average soil firmness increased by a factor of 15.55. The brightness and chromaticity of the soil color also increased

as did the bulk density (by 33.43%). The thickness of the litter layer and soil moisture content both decreased. The contents of soil organic matter

total nitrogen

alkali-hydrolyzed nitrogen

available phosphorus

and available potassium decreased by 61.31%

61.58%

32.21%

72.08%

and 36.26%

respectively.[Conclusion] The soil ecological environment of the Lijiang scenic area shifted periodically under the disturbance caused by tourism. Selected soils were degraded to different degrees

the comprehensive fertility of the soil reduced

and the soil structure deteriorated

which can be expected to affect vegetation and the landscape. Therefore

effective management measures and relevant technology should be introduced to weaken the negative effects of tourism on the ecological environment of the Lijiang scenic area.

关键词

Keywords

references

李鹏,濮励杰,章锦河.旅游活动对土壤环境影响的国内研究进展[J].地理科学进展,2012,31(8):1097-1105.

杨丽.旅游活动下罗浮山格木种群和土壤性质的变化[J].西南农业学报,2016,29(7):1672-1677.

李艳,严艳.旅游活动对庐山风景区土壤的影响[J].江西农业学报,2013,25(9):62-65.

唐政,李继光,李慧,等.喀斯特土壤微生物和活性有机碳对生态恢复的快速响应[J].生态环境学报,2014,23(7):1130-1135.

管东生,林卫强.旅游干扰对白云山土壤和植被的影响[J].环境科学,1999,20(6):6-9.

Bellot J, Bonet A, Peña J, et al. Human impacts on land cover and water balances in a coastal Mediterranean County[J]. Environmental Management, 2007,39(3):412-422.

Shi Qiang. The impact of tourism on soils in Zhangjiajie World Geopark[J]. Journal of Forestry Research, 2006,17(2):167-170.

Wu Zhongdong. The study on impact of soil physicochemical properties and vegetation by tourism-the case of Lushan forest park in Shandong Province, Zibo City[C]//Proceedings of 2010 International Symposium on Tourism Resources and Management, 2010:250-255.

Yuksek T. Effect of visitor activities on surface soil environmental conditions and aboveground herbaceous biomass in Ayder Natural Park[J]. Clean-soil Air Water, 2009,37(2):170-175.

廖梅英.旅游对武当山不同景区土壤性质影响的研究[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(5):2731-2733.

陆林,巩劼,晋秀龙.旅游干扰对黄山风景区土壤的影响[J].地理研究,2011,30(2):209-223.

肖艳,林华,陈其兵,等.游憩活动对王朗自然保护区土壤环境的影响[J].成都大学学报(自然科学版),2016,35(3):289-295.

Ciarkowska K. Assessment of heavy metal pollution risks and enzyme activity of meadow soils in urban area under tourism load:A case study from Zakopane (Poland)[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research,2018,25(14):13709-13718.

邓雪倩,夏奇.践踏胁迫对低山丘陵地带森林公园土壤环境的影响[J].长春工业大学学报(自然科学版),2019,31(3):228-233.

李灵,张玉,江慧华,等.旅游干扰对武夷山风景区土壤质量的影响[J].水土保持研究,2009,16(6):56-62.

晋秀龙,陆林.旅游生态学研究方法评述[J].生态学报,2008,28(5):2343-2356.

中国城市规划设计研究院.桂林漓江风景名胜区总体规划[Z].2011.

鲁如坤.土壤农业化学分析方法[M].北京:中国农业科学技术出版社,2000.

张甘霖,龚子同.土壤调查实验室分析方法[M].北京:科学出版社,2012.

文红.在森林文化的导引下管理森林旅游生态环境[J].江西农业大学学报(社会科学版),2005(2):147-150.

张广海,刘佳.旅游环境承载力研究进展[J].生态经济,2008(5):81-83,90.

刘飞,李柯青,项清,等. 基于大数据分析的旅游景点承载力模型设计[J]. 现代电子技术,2018,41(12):52-55.

唐昱,邢家仲,赵文清,等.土壤改良技术的措施探析[J].现代园艺,2015(15):66-67.

浏览量

786

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

北京市门头沟区群发性坡面泥石流成因及防治措施

西藏县域生态-经济-社会耦合协调发展的时空演变及预测

冻融循环条件下伊犁地区滑坡黄土湿陷特性及微观机理

不同恢复措施对新疆伊犁退化草地植被特征及多样性的影响

中国典型河口三角洲生态系统服务价值的时空异质性