毛乌素沙地不同植被恢复措施下土壤理化性质空间分布特征

姜丽娜; 马洁; 刘建康; 王少杰; 赵健宇; 白建华

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.20221012.004

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

毛乌素沙地不同植被恢复措施下土壤理化性质空间分布特征

试验研究

- 毛乌素沙地不同植被恢复措施下土壤理化性质空间分布特征
- Spatial Distribution of Soil Physicochemical Properties Under Different Vegetation Restoration Measures in Mu Us Sand Land
- 水土保持通报 2022年42卷第5期页码：1-7
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 中国林业科学研究院生态保护与修复研究所,北京,100091
  2. 宁夏大学西北土地退化与生态恢复国家重点实验室培育基地,宁夏,银川,750021
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目“土壤斑块异质性下荒漠草原植被空间格局及其形成机制” (32001117);中国林业科学研究院生态保护与修复研究所结余经费专项资金 (XJS202002)
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.20221012.004
  中图分类号： S728.4
- 纸质出版：2022
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
姜丽娜, 马洁, 刘建康, 等. 毛乌素沙地不同植被恢复措施下土壤理化性质空间分布特征[J]. 水土保持通报, 2022,42(5):1-7.

Jiang Lina, Ma Jie, Liu Jiankang, et al. Spatial Distribution of Soil Physicochemical Properties Under Different Vegetation Restoration Measures in Mu Us Sand Land[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2022, 42(5): 1-7.
姜丽娜, 马洁, 刘建康, 等. 毛乌素沙地不同植被恢复措施下土壤理化性质空间分布特征[J]. 水土保持通报, 2022,42(5):1-7. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.20221012.004.

Jiang Lina, Ma Jie, Liu Jiankang, et al. Spatial Distribution of Soil Physicochemical Properties Under Different Vegetation Restoration Measures in Mu Us Sand Land[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2022, 42(5): 1-7. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.20221012.004.

摘要

[目的] 探讨不同植被恢复措施下土壤理化性质的空间分布特征，为半干旱沙区植被恢复提供理论依据。[方法] 以毛乌素沙地西南边缘3种典型植被恢复模式(封育草地、飞播林地和人工柠条林地)为研究对象，以退化草地为对照，通过采集0—40 cm范围内3个土层的土壤，研究了其土壤理化指标和土壤综合肥力。[结果] ①在不同措施下土壤表层(0—10 cm)含水量显著增加，而在深层(10—40 cm)土壤则显著降低；与之相反的是土壤表层容重显著降低，而在深层土壤差异不显著，呈现弱变异；植被恢复显著降低了上层(0—20 cm)土壤pH值，而对20—40 cm土层差异不显著；此外，同一植被类型下随着土层加深土壤含水量(SWC)、容重(BD)、pH值均逐渐增加。②不同措施下土壤有机质(SOM)、全氮(TN)含量显著增加，封育样地SOM最高，飞播样地土壤TN最高，而速效磷(AP)含量显著降低，土壤全磷(TP)、SOM、TN等养分含量具有表聚性，土壤AP和速效氮(AN)含量在不同植被恢复、不同土层之间存在差异性。③土壤综合肥力指数呈现为：飞播样地(0.794)>封育样地(0.662)>对照样地(0.637)>柠条林地(0.603)，即土壤质量在飞播样地最高，而在柠条林地最低。[结论] 3种植被恢复模式均对土壤各理化指标有显著影响，不同植被恢复措施导致土壤各指标在垂直剖面上发生不同程度的变异，毛乌素沙地适宜进行飞播造林，而不宜大面积种植人工柠条林。

Abstract

[Objective] The spatial distribution characteristics of physicochemical properties under different vegetation restoration measures were analyzed in order to provide a theoretical basis for vegetation restoration in semi-arid sandy areas. [Methods] Three typical restoration models 〔enclosed grassland (EG)

aerial seeded woodland (AS)

and artificial Caragana korshinskii woodland (AK)〕 were compared against a degraded grassland (CG) used as control in the Southwest Mu Us sand land. Soil physicochemical indexes and a comprehensive soil fertility index in the 0—40 cm soil layer were analyzed. [Results] ① Soil water content (SWC) in the 0—10 cm layer significantly increased under the three different vegetation restoration measures

but decreased significantly in the 10—40 cm layer. In contrast

soil bulk density (BD) in the 0—10 cm layer decreased significantly

but there was no significant difference in 10—40 cm layer

which showed weak variation. Vegetation restoration significantly reduced soil pH value in the 0—20 cm layer

but showed no significant difference in the 20—40 cm layer. In addition

SWC

and pH value increased as soil depth increased under the same vegetation restoration measure. ② Soil organic matter (SOM) and total nitrogen (TN) increased significantly

while available phosphorus (AP) decreased significantly under different vegetation restoration measures. SOM was highest in EG

but TN was highest in AS. Total phosphorus (TP)

SOM

and TN exhibited surface aggregation in the soil. AP and available nitrogen (AN) were different for different restoration measures and soil layers. ③ The soil comprehensive fertility index followed the order of AS (0.794)>EG (0.662)>CG (0.637)>AK (0.603)

indicating that soil quality was highest in AS

but lowest in AK. [Conclusion] Various vegetation restoration measures had significant effects on soil physiochemical properties

and resulted in different variations in soil indexes in the vertical soil profile. Aerial seeding is suitable for afforestation

while large area artificial Caragana korshinskii woodland is not suitable for the Mu Us sand land.

关键词

Keywords

references

唐庄生,安慧,邓蕾,等.荒漠草原沙漠化植物群落及土壤物理变化[J].生态学报,2016,36(4):991-1000.

赵哈林,李玉强,周瑞莲.沙漠化对科尔沁沙质草地生态系统碳氮储量的影响[J].应用生态学报,2007,18(11):2412-2417.

Su Yongzhong, Zhao Wenzhi, Su Peixi, et al. Ecological effects of desertification control and desertified land reclamation in an oasis-desert ecotone in an arid region: A case study in Hexi Corridor, Northwest China [J]. Ecological Engineering, 2007,29(2):117-124.

Tao Ye, Zhang Yuanming. Plant traits with different dimensions of shrubs represent different spatial patterns and plant-to-plant interactions in a temperate desert [J]. EXCLI Journal, 2013,12:658-669.

袁媛,张鹤,武杼华,等.植被恢复对毛乌素沙地土壤pH和养分含量的影响[J].土壤通报,2021,52(1):148-156.

Wu Gaolin, Liu Zhenheng, Zhang Lei, et al. Long-term fencing improved soil properties and soil organic carbon storage in an alpine swamp meadow of Western China [J]. Plant and Soil, 2010,332(S1/2):331-337.

胡婵娟,刘国华,陈利顶,等.黄土丘陵区坡面尺度上不同植被格局下植物群落和土壤性质研究[J].干旱区地理,2012,35(5):787-794.

陈闻,杨晶晶,袁媛,等.毛乌素沙地人工固沙植被的土壤养分效应[J].干旱区研究,2020,37(6):1447-1456.

常学礼,蔡明玉,张继平,等.科尔沁沙地典型地区人工造林对沙漠化过程的影响[J].中国漠,2009,29(4):611-616.

林帅,闫伟,贾学文,等.毛乌素沙地不同林型下土壤肥力综合评价[J].北方园艺,2019(15):91-98.

卞莹莹,张志敏,付镇,等.荒漠草原区不同植被恢复模式土壤微生物菌落分布特征及其与土壤理化性质的相关性[J].草地学报,2021,29(4):655-663.

Yang Zhaoping, Baoyin T, Li F Y. Long-term effects of restoration measures on soil C and C: Nutrient ratios in a semiarid steppe [J]. Ecological Engineering, 2020,153:105913.

王丽梅,张谦,白利华,等.毛乌素沙地3种人工植被类型对土壤颗粒组成和固碳的影响[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(1):88-94.

何群,席欢,万婷.不同植被恢复模式对红原沙化草地土壤理化性质的影响[J].四川环境,2017,36(1):35-40.

Zhou Ji, Fu Bojie, Gao Guangyao, et al. Temporal stability of surface soil moisture of different vegetation types in the Loess Plateau of China [J]. Catena, 2015,128:1-15.

Cantón Y, Solé-Benet A, Domingo F. Temporal and spatial patterns of soil moisture in semiarid badlands of SE Spain [J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2004,285(1/2/3/4):199-214.

陈闻.毛乌素沙地不同人工植被措施对土壤性质的影响[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2020.

Liu Xinping, He Yuhui, Zhang Tonghui, et al. The response of infiltration depth, evaporation, and soil water replenishment to rainfall in mobile dunes in the Horqin Sandy Land, Northern China [J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2015,73(12):8699-8708.

Oba G, Vetaas O R, Stenseth N C. Relationships between biomass and plant species richness in arid-zone grazing lands [J]. Journal of Applied Ecology, 2001,38(4):836-845.

张克斌,卢晓杰,李瑞.北方农牧交错带沙地生物结皮研究[J].干旱区资源与环境,2008,22(4):147-151.

崔利强,吴波,杨文斌,等.毛乌素沙地东南缘不同植被盖度下土壤水分特征分析[J].干旱区资源与环境,2010,24(2):177-182.

赵景波,马延东,罗小庆,等.巴丹吉林沙漠沙山表层径流的发现及其指示意义[J].中国科学(地球科学),2017,47(4):461-472.

谭学进,穆兴民,高鹏,等.黄土区植被恢复对土壤物理性质的影响[J].中国环境科学,2019,39(2):713-722.

关其格,浩必斯嘎拉图,杨越,等.毛乌素沙地南缘人工恢复植被对沙地土壤理化性质的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2013,41(34):13217-13220.

李永宁,王忠禹,王兵,等.黄土丘陵区典型植被土壤物理性质差异及其对导水特性影响[J].水土保持学报,2019,33(6):176-181.

王彦武,廖超英,徐恒.毛乌素沙地固沙林土壤物理性状研究[J].西北林学院学报,2008,23(3):36-39.

张立欣,段玉玺,王伟峰,等.毛乌素沙地不同植被类型的土壤颗粒分形与土壤碳氮变化特征[J].东北林业大学学报,2016,44(8):55-60.

张瑞,张景波,曹良图.干旱区土地利用和土壤改良及植被恢复方式对沙地养分的恢复效应[J].水土保持研究,2010,17(4):153-157.

Zhou Zhiyu, Li Fengrui, Chen Shanke, et al. Dynamics of vegetation and soil carbon and nitrogen accumulation over 26 years under controlled grazing in a desert shrubland [J]. Plant and Soil, 2011,341(1/2):257-268.

Shumway S W. Facilitative effects of a sand dune shrub on species growing beneath the shrub canopy [J]. Oecologia, 2000,124(1):138-148.

Prietzel J, Bachmann S. Changes in soil organic C and N stocks after forest transformation from Norway spruce and Scots pine into Douglas fir, Douglas fir/spruce, or European beech stands at different sites in Southern Germany [J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2012,269:134-148.

Shi Xiaoming, Li Xiao gang, Li Chun tao, et al. Grazing exclusion decreases soil organic C storage at an alpine grassland of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau [J]. Ecological Engineering, 2013,57:183-187.

刘佳楠,常海涛,赵娟,等.宁夏荒漠草原柠条锦鸡儿枯落物分解特征及其影响因素[J].生态学报,2019,39(11):4039-4048.

黄海娟.桉树人工林土壤肥力质量指标的筛选与评价[D].湖南长沙:中南林业科技大学,2021.

李清雪,贾志清.高寒沙地不同植被恢复类型土壤肥力质量差异及评价[J].土壤通报,2015,46(5):1145-1154.

浏览量

883

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

人为干扰方式对希拉穆仁草原土壤-草地系统健康的影响

放牧强度对干旱区白墩子盐沼湿地土壤与植被的影响

改良剂对秦巴山区新造耕地土壤质量的影响

毛乌素沙地东南缘沙漠化过程中土壤理化性质分析

半干旱退化山区不同土地利用方式土壤理化性质的特征研究