不同植物配置模式对人工边坡减流减沙效益的影响

昝玉亭; 奚同行; 吴治玲; 张华明; 龚长春; 熊峰; 李英

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2022.03.001

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

不同植物配置模式对人工边坡减流减沙效益的影响

试验研究

- 不同植物配置模式对人工边坡减流减沙效益的影响
- Effects of Different Plant Configuration Patterns on Flow and Sediment Reduction of Artificial Slope
- 水土保持通报 2022年42卷第3期页码：1-7
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 江西省水利科学院,江西,南昌,330029
  2. 江西省土壤侵蚀与防治重点实验室,江西,南昌,330029
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  江西省科技厅重点研发计划项目“江西红壤区工程堆积体水土保持植被优化配置研究”（2016BBG70086）;江西省水利厅科技项目（202123YBKT13，202123BZKT02）;江西省水利科学院江西省土壤侵蚀与防治重点实验室开放基金项目（KFJJ201804，KFJJ202004）
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2022.03.001
  中图分类号： S157.1;S157.2
- 纸质出版：2022
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
昝玉亭, 奚同行, 吴治玲, 等. 不同植物配置模式对人工边坡减流减沙效益的影响[J]. 水土保持通报, 2022,42(3):1-7.

Zan Yuting, Xi Tonghang, Wu Zhiling, et al. Effects of Different Plant Configuration Patterns on Flow and Sediment Reduction of Artificial Slope[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2022, 42(3): 1-7.
昝玉亭, 奚同行, 吴治玲, 等. 不同植物配置模式对人工边坡减流减沙效益的影响[J]. 水土保持通报, 2022,42(3):1-7. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2022.03.001.

Zan Yuting, Xi Tonghang, Wu Zhiling, et al. Effects of Different Plant Configuration Patterns on Flow and Sediment Reduction of Artificial Slope[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2022, 42(3): 1-7. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2022.03.001.

摘要

[目的] 探讨不同植物模式（混草、花草、灌草、乔草）及配置比例对生产建设项目人工边坡水土流失的影响，为人工边坡植被恢复提供参考。[方法] 采用径流小区定位观测法，记录2019年1—12月自然降雨，研究4种植物模式的产流产沙特点，揭示4种植物模式的减流减沙效益。[结果] ①观测期内总降雨量为1 052.73 mm，总降雨历时为845.1 h，7月降雨量最大，2月降雨历时最长，降雨集中在1—7月，以中雨、大雨、暴雨为主。②每场降雨产流差异大，产流月季差异大，集中在2—4月及7月，多发生在中雨、大雨和暴雨情况。③每场降雨及月、季降雨之间产沙差异大，3月产沙最大，产沙集中在2—4月及7月，多发生中雨、大雨和暴雨。④以花草模式为对照，每场降雨条件下灌草模式的减流率最大，乔草模式的减沙率最大，月降雨累计条件下，混草模式减流率最大，乔草模式减沙率最大，不同降雨等级累积和全年累积条件下，乔草模式的减流减沙率最大。[结论] 植被恢复初期，受植被覆盖度差异影响，乔草模式、混草模式的减流减沙率较大，具有较好的固土保持效益。

Abstract

[Objective] The impacts of different plant patterns and configuration proportions on soil and water loss of an artificial slope were analyzed in order to provide reference for artificial slope vegetation restoration.[Methods] Natural rainfall from January to December 2019 was measured and the runoff and sediment yield characteristics for runoff plots was simulated using four different vegetation patterns to determine the runoff and sediment reduction benefits of different vegetation patterns.[Results] ① Total rainfall during the observation period was 1 053 mm

and total rainfall duration was 845.1 hours. Rainfall in July was the largest

and rainfall in February had the longest duration. Rainfall was concentrated in January to July

and classified mainly as moderate rain

heavy rain

and rainstorm. ② The variation in runoff yield per rainfall was large

and the variation in monthly and seasonal runoff yield was also large

mainly occurring in February-April and July

in events classified as moderate

heavy rain

and rainstorm. ③ The sediment yield of field rainfall

monthly rainfall and seasonal rainfall was very different. Sediment yield in March was the highest

and the sediment yield was concentrated in February-April and July

with frequent occurrences of moderate rain

heavy rain

and rainstorm events. ④ Compared with the flower-grass pattern

the shrub-grass pattern had the largest runoff reduction and the tree-grass pattern had the largest sediment reduction rate under each rainfall type. The tree-grass pattern had the largest sediment reduction rate

and the herb pattern had the largest runoff reduction rate under the monthly rainfall accumulation. The tree-grass pattern had the largest runoff and sediment reduction rate under the condition of accumulation of different rainfall classes and annual accumulation.[Conclusion] In the early stage of vegetation restoration

affected by the difference in vegetation coverage

the tree-grass pattern and the herb pattern had a higher rate of flow reduction and sediment reduction

and had better soil conservation benefits.

关键词

Keywords

references

Zhang L T, Gao Z L, Li Z B, et al.Downslope runoff and erosion response of typical engineered landform to variable inflow rate patterns from upslope[J].Natural Hazards, 2016, 80(2):775-796.

张华明, 吴治玲, 昝玉亭, 等.江西省山地风电项目区水土流失与防治研究[J].水土保持通报, 2018, 38(4):7-13.

袁普金, 张翔, 王万君, 等.植物篱措施下工程堆积体坡面减流减沙效益研究[J].水土保持研究, 2016, 23(6):374-380.

齐星圆.堆积体坡面植被格局减流减沙效益及侵蚀泥沙颗粒研究[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2019.

杨洁, 莫明浩, 宋月君, 等.红壤坡地水土保持植物措施下柑橘林地水文生态效应[J].长江流域资源与环境, 2012, 21(8):994-999.

郑明新, 黄钢, 彭晶.不同生长期多花木兰根系抗拉拔特性及其根系边坡的稳定性[J].农业工程学报, 2018, 34(20):175-182.

高磊, 饶良懿, 崔飞波, 等.太行山土石山区侵蚀性降雨对典型植物措施产流产沙的影响[J].水土保持学报, 2017, 31(1):5-11.

王志刚, 杨海龙, 刘慧博, 等.河岸边坡草被减流减沙效应及其坡面流水动力学特征[J].水土保持学报, 2016, 30(2):8-13.

李婷婷, 何铁光, 俞月凤, 等.桂东北坡地果园生草栽培减流减沙效应[J].水土保持通报, 2020, 40(2):31-36.

宋科, 秦秦, 郑宪清, 等.水肥一体化结合植物篱对减缓果园土壤氮磷地表径流流失的效果[J].水土保持学报, 2021, 35(3):83-89.

李建明, 牛俊, 孙蓓, 等.两种驱动力作用下植被调控堆积体坡面减水减沙效益[J].农业工程学报, 2021, 37(11):76-84.

张琳卿, 覃莉, 刘忠仙, 等.黔中喀斯特地区坡面种植措施对土壤水分及产流产沙的影响[J].水土保持通报, 2021, 41(3):15-21, 30.

General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of China.GB15774-2008, Calculation method of benefit in soil and water conservation[S].Beijing:China Standards Press, 2008.

张华明, 昝玉亭, 张晓亮, 等.降雨因子对粉煤灰产流产渣的影响[J].水土保持学报, 2017, 31(2):27-32.

张兴奇, 顾礼彬, 张科利, 等.坡度对黔西北地区坡面产流产沙的影响[J].水土保持学报, 2015, 29(4):18-22.

王葆, 程金花, 王文凯, 等.北京北部褐土区2种典型植物措施减流减沙效应[J].水土保持学报, 2017, 31(3):56-61, 68.

蒋涛, 谢炎敏, 陈志彪, 等.福建省长汀县不同水保措施的减流减沙效应[J].水土保持通报, 2018, 38(6):35-41.

夏晓平, 信忠保, 赵云杰, 等.北京山区河岸植被的水土保持效益[J].水土保持学报, 2018, 32(5):71-77, 83.

梁娟珠.不同植被措施下红壤坡面径流变化特征[J].水土保持通报, 2015, 35(6):159-163.

花东文, 温仲明.黄土丘陵区不同植被恢复阶段下的暴雨产流产沙研究[J].水土保持学报, 2015, 29(4):27-31, 90.

浏览量

794

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

黄土裸坡降雨产流过程试验研究

降雨对黄土边坡稳定性的影响

新疆天池自然保护区草地坡地土壤侵蚀规律研究

黄土丘陵沟壑区林草植被恢复的减沙效益研究

四川省石棉县地质灾害发生的雨量条件与气象预警(报)