不同雨强下各生育期玉米坡耕地的侵蚀产沙研究

赵娅君; 吴发启; 徐宁; 曹博召

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2020.06.004

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

不同雨强下各生育期玉米坡耕地的侵蚀产沙研究

水土保持试验研究

- 不同雨强下各生育期玉米坡耕地的侵蚀产沙研究
- Runoff and Sediment Yield of Corn Plots in Different Growth Stages Under Different Rainfall Intensities
- 水土保持通报 2020年40卷第6期页码：23-28
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 西北农林科技大学水土保持研究所, 陕西杨凌,712100
  2. 西北农林科技大学资源环境学院, 陕西杨凌,712100
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目“黄土坡耕地作物覆盖与管理的防蚀作用研究”（41977065）
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2020.06.004
  中图分类号： S157.1
- 纸质出版：2020
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
赵娅君, 吴发启, 徐宁, 等. 不同雨强下各生育期玉米坡耕地的侵蚀产沙研究[J]. 水土保持通报, 2020,40(6):23-28.

Zhao Yajun, Wu Faqi, Xu Ning, et al. Runoff and Sediment Yield of Corn Plots in Different Growth Stages Under Different Rainfall Intensities[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2020, 40(6): 23-28.
赵娅君, 吴发启, 徐宁, 等. 不同雨强下各生育期玉米坡耕地的侵蚀产沙研究[J]. 水土保持通报, 2020,40(6):23-28. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2020.06.004.

Zhao Yajun, Wu Faqi, Xu Ning, et al. Runoff and Sediment Yield of Corn Plots in Different Growth Stages Under Different Rainfall Intensities[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2020, 40(6): 23-28. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2020.06.004.

摘要

[目的] 研究玉米作物对坡耕地的防蚀效果，为黄土高原坡面水土流失防治提供科学依据。[方法] 采用室外人工模拟降雨试验，分析玉米在幼苗期、拔节初期、拔节中期、拔节后期、抽雄期5个不同生育期对坡耕地侵蚀产沙量和过程的影响。[结果] ①随着玉米作物生长，它对坡面产流产沙的抵御作用增强，幼苗期效果微弱，抽雄期最盛，抽雄期相比裸地可减少48.5%径流量和73.7%产沙量。不同生长阶段玉米作物的减沙效果优于减流效果。②降雨的产流产沙过程呈现不断波动趋势，玉米作物使初始产流产沙时间延迟，稳定产流产沙阶段平均产流产沙量下降。雨强从40 mm/h增加到80 mm/h使产流产沙量增长率大于100%，径流系数和含沙量均增加，侵蚀过程更加剧烈。③叶面积指数与不同生育期玉米地坡面的土壤流失比率有较好的指数相关关系，可使用叶面积指数来估算不同生育期玉米地坡面的土壤流失比率，为估算年植被覆盖与管理因子C值奠定基础。[结论] 随着玉米生长，其防蚀效果增强，但幼苗期和拔节初期侵蚀严重，需采取辅助措施防治水土流失。雨强增加使玉米和裸地条件下侵蚀产沙更为严重。

Abstract

[Objective] The anti-erosion effects of corn on slope farmland was studied in order to provide a theoretical basis for the prevention and control of soil erosion on slope farmland in the Loess Plateau region.[Methods] An outdoor artificial simulated rain test was conducted to analyze the effects of corn on the runoff and sediment production and erosion process on slope farmland at five different growth stages

such as seedling stage

early jointing stage

mid-joint stage

late jointing stage

and tasseling stage.[Results] ① With the growth of crops

the resistance of corn to runoff and sediment yield increased

this effect was the weakest in the seedling stage and the strongest in the tasseling stage. Compared with bare land

the average runoff and sediment yield of corn plot decreased by 48.5% and 73.7% respectively. The sediment reduction effect of corn in different growth stages was better than that of runoff reduction effect. ② The process of runoff and sediment yield showed a continuous fluctuation trend. Corn crops delyaed the initial time of runoff and sediment yield

and the average runoff and sediment yield decreased in stable runoff and sediment yield stage. When rainfall intensity increased from 40 mm/h to 80 mm/h

the increase rate of runoff and sediment yield was more than 100%

the runoff coefficient and sediment concentration increased

and the erosion process became more severe. ③ There was a good exponential correlation between leaf area index and soil loss ratio of corn slope at different growth stages. The leaf area index could be used to estimate the soil loss ratio of corn slope in different growth periods

which laid a foundation for estimating annual vegetation cover and management factor C value.[Conclusion] With the growth of corn

the anti-erosion effect of corn is enhanced

but the erosion is serious at seedling stage and early jointing stage

auxiliary measures should be taken to prevent soil and water erosion. The increase of rainfall intensity makes the erosion and sediment yield more serious under various underlying surface conditions.

关键词

Keywords

references

刘莉丽,张建军,聂小妮,等.坡耕地土壤流失规律研究[J].西北林学院学报,2005,20(4):101-103.

Singh R K, Panda R K, Satapathy K K, et al. Simulation of runoff and sediment yield from a hilly watershed in the eastern Himalaya, India using the WEPP model[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2011, 405(3/4):261-276.

Kang Yaohu, Wang Qinggai, Liu Haijun. Winter wheat canopy interception and its influence factors under sprinkler irrigation[J]. Agricultural Water Management, 2005, 74(3):189-199.

王迪,李久生,饶敏杰.玉米冠层对喷灌水量再分配影响的田间试验研究[J].农业工程学报,2006,22(7):43-47.

Quinn N W, Laflen J M. Characteristics of raindrop throughfall under corn canopy[J]. Transactions of the ASAE, 1983,26(5):1445-1450.

王丰,徐佩,严坤,等.三峡库区典型农作物对降雨侵蚀的影响[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(1):92-95,101.

朱司航,王红,周大迈,等.石灰岩地不同作物坡面土壤侵蚀和养分流失的影响[J].水土保持学报,2016,30(3):12-18.

王健,尹武君,刘旦旦.玉米苜蓿间作对黄土坡耕地降雨产流产沙的影响[J].节水灌溉,2011(8):43-46.

安曈昕,周锋,吴珍珍,等.坡耕地间作作物群体水土保持耕作措施[J].水土保持研究,2019,26(2):17-22.

冯冬霞,施生锦.叶面积测定方法的研究效果初报[J].中国农学通报,2005,21(6):150-152,155.

马波,吴发启,陈宇,等.玉米不同生育期茎秆流特征及其模型构建[J].农业工程学报,2011,27(1):118-123.

吴佳,王林华,李占斌,等.黄土高原主要秋作物坡地降雨入渗特征参数研究[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(6):115-119.

高朝侠,徐学选,宇苗子,等.黄土塬区土地利用方式对土壤大孔隙特征的影响[J].应用生态学报,2014,25(6):1578-1584.

Prieksat M A, Kaspar T C, Ankeny M D. Positional and temporal changes in ponded infiltration in a corn field[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1994,58(1):181.

马波,吴发启,李占斌,等.作物与坡度交互作用对坡面径流侵蚀产沙的影响[J].水土保持学报,2013,27(3):33-38.

郑子成,张锡洲,李廷轩,等.玉米生长期土壤抗蚀性特征及其影响因素分析[J].农业工程学报,2014,30(4):100-108.

王丰,徐佩,严坤,等.三峡库区典型农作物对降雨侵蚀的影响[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(1):92-95,101.

朱智勇,解建仓,李占斌,等.坡面径流侵蚀产沙机理试验研究[J].水土保持学报,2011,25(5):1-7.

张会茹,郑粉莉.不同降雨强度下地面坡度对红壤坡面土壤侵蚀过程的影响[J].水土保持学报,2011,25(3):40-43.

李朝霞,王天巍,史志华,等.降雨过程中红壤表土结构变化与侵蚀产沙关系[J].水土保持学报,2005,19(1):1-4,9.

孙佳佳,于东升,史学正,等.植被叶面积指数与覆盖度定量表征红壤区土壤侵蚀关系的对比研究[J].土壤学报,2010,47(6):1060-1066.

林杰,张金池,顾哲衍,等.基于叶面积指数的植被覆盖管理措施因子

的遥感定量估算[J].林业科学,2013,49(2):86-92.

马波,刘雨鑫,吴发启.植大豆对坡耕地径流侵蚀产沙的影响[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(4):32-36.

浏览量

948

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

黄土高原退耕还林工程中的现存问题及有关建议

淤地坝系试点示范建设浅见

黄土高原南部丘陵沟壑区果畜沼复合经营模式生态经济效益分析

不同治理措施在红壤坡耕地的水土保持效益

黄土高原上黄试区土地利用适宜性评价