1. 东华理工大学 江西省数字国土重点实验室,江西,南昌,330013
2. 东华理工大学 地球科学学院,江西,南昌,330013
3. 福建师范大学 地理科学学院,福建,福州,350007
4. 韶关学院 旅游与地理学院,广东,韶关,512005
纸质出版:2023
移动端阅览
白永会, 查轩, 吴伟成, 等. 不同植被恢复模式对退化花岗岩红壤渗透性和持水量的影响[J]. 水土保持通报, 2023,43(2):9-15.
Bai Yonghui, Zha Xuan, Wu Weicheng, et al. Effects of Different Vegetation Restoration Types on Permeability and Water Holding Capacity of Degraded Granite Red Soil[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2023, 43(2): 9-15.
白永会, 查轩, 吴伟成, 等. 不同植被恢复模式对退化花岗岩红壤渗透性和持水量的影响[J]. 水土保持通报, 2023,43(2):9-15. DOI: 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2023.02.002.
Bai Yonghui, Zha Xuan, Wu Weicheng, et al. Effects of Different Vegetation Restoration Types on Permeability and Water Holding Capacity of Degraded Granite Red Soil[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2023, 43(2): 9-15. DOI: 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2023.02.002.
[目的] 研究不同植被恢复模式对退化花岗岩红壤渗透性和持水量的影响,为该区水土保持和红壤退化地的精准恢复提供理论依据。 [方法] 采用野外调查、室内分析和环刀法,以严重退化花岗岩红壤和自然林为对照,对不同植被恢复模式下退化花岗岩红壤的土壤渗透性和持水量进行研究。 [结果] 不同植被恢复模式和对照样地的土壤渗透性均随土层深度的增加而降低,土壤入渗特征值均表现为:初始入渗率>平均渗透率>稳定入渗率;不同植被恢复模式与对照样地比校,土壤渗透性指标和前30 min土壤渗透总量数值顺序为:自然林>乔灌草>条沟草灌>封禁>低效林改造>全坡面播草>严重退化地;0—40 cm土壤持水量的顺序为:自然林>乔灌草模式>条沟草灌>封禁>低效林改造>全坡面播草>严重退化地。0—5 cm土壤渗透性指标和土壤理化指标的冗余分析表明,土壤有机碳、全氮、全磷、速效磷、全钾、速效钾、pH值、粉粒含量是改善土壤渗透性的因子,而土壤硬度、土壤容重、黏粒和砂砾含量是制约土壤渗透性的因子。 [结论] 5种植被恢复模式中乔灌草植被恢复模式是改善土壤渗透性和持水量的最佳模式。
[Objective] The effects of different vegetation restoration types on the permeability and water holding capacity of degraded granite red soil were studied in order to provide a theoretical basis for soil and water conservation and accurate restoration of degraded red soil in this area. [Methods] With seriously degraded granite red soil and natural forest (NV) as the control treatment
we determined the soil permeability and soil water holding capacity of degraded granite red soil under different vegetation restoration types using field investigation
laboratory analysis
and the ring knife method. [Results] Soil permeability decreased with increasing soil depth for different vegetation restoration types. The characteristic values of soil infiltration followed the order of initial infiltration rate > average infiltration rate > stable infiltration rate. The soil permeability and the total amount of soil permeability in the first 30 min for the different vegetation types were compared with that of NV. Soil permeability and total soil permeability in the first 30 min followed the order of NV > arbor
shrub
grass (ASG) > grass in irrigation ditches (GGH) > closed canopy (CC) > low-efficiency forest transformation (IFT) > grass sown in the whole slope (FSG) > severely degraded land (HDL). The sequence of saturated water storage in the 0—40 cm soil layer followed the order of NV > ASG > GGH > CC > IFT > FSG > HDL. Redundancy analysis of soil permeability indexes and soil physical and chemical properties from the 0—5 cm soil layer showed that soil hardness
soil bulk density
silt content
and sand content were the factors that restricted soil permeability
and soil organic carbon
total nitrogen
total phosphorus
available phosphorus
total potassium
available potassium
pH value
and clay content were the important factors that could increase soil permeability. [Conclusion] ASG was the best vegetation restoration type to increase soil permeability and water holding capacity.
莫斌,陈晓燕,杨以翠,等.不同土地利用类型土壤入渗性能及其影响因素研究[J].水土保持研究,2016,23(1):13-17.
Ma Wenmei, Zhang Xingchang. Effect of Pisha sandstone on water infiltration of different soils on the Chinese Loess Plateau [J]. Journal of Arid Land,2016,8(3):331-340.
刘霞,张光灿,李雪蕾,等.小流域生态修复过程中不同森林植被土壤入渗与贮水特征[J].水土保持学报,2001,18(6):1-5.
杨静,张耀艺,谭思懿,等.亚热带不同树种土壤水源涵养功能[J].生态学报,2020,40(13):4594-4604.
林代杰,郑子成,张锡洲,等.不同土地利用方式下土壤入渗特征及其影响因素[J].水土保持学报,2010,2(1):33-36.
Startsev A D, Mcnabb D H. Effects of skidding on forest soil infiltration in West Central Alberta [J]. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 2000,80(4):617-62.
Philip J R. Theory of infiltration [J]. Advance in Hydroscicnce, 1969,5:216-296.
王全九,来剑斌,李毅. Green-Ampt模型与Philip入渗模型的对比分析[J].农业工程学报,2002,18(2):13-16.
王意锟,金爱武,方升佐.浙西南毛竹林覆盖对土壤渗透性及生物特征的影响[J].应用生态学报,2017,28(5):1431-1440.
赵洋毅,王玉杰,王云琦,等.渝北水源区水源涵养林构建模式对土壤渗透性的影响[J].生态学报,2010,(15):4162-4172.
张昌顺,范少辉,管凤英,等.闽北毛竹林的土壤渗透性及其影响因子[J].林业科学,2009,45(1):36-42.
傅伯杰,刘国华,陈利顶,等.中国生态退化的主要类型特征及分布[J].生态学报,2000,1(1):13-19.
赵其国.我国红壤的退化问题[J].土壤侵蚀与水土保持报,1995,27(6):281-286.
姚雄,余坤勇,刘健,等.南方水土流失严重区的生态脆弱性时空演变应用[J].生态学报,2016,27(3).735-745.
查轩,黄少燕,林金堂.林地针叶化对土壤微生物特征影响研究[J].水土保持报,2003,17(4),18-21.
朱鹤健.长汀水土保持研究[M],北京:科学出版社,2013.
王玉婷,查轩,陈世发,等.红壤侵蚀退化马尾松林下不同治理模式土壤化学计量特征[J].应用生态学报,2020,31(1):8.
张淑兰,张海军,张武,等.小兴安岭南麓典型森林类型的土壤水文功能研究[J].水土保持研究,2015,22(1):140-145.
王辉,王全九,邵明安.前期土壤含水量对黄土坡面氮磷流失的影响及最优含水量的确定[J].环境科学学报,2008,28(8):1571-1578.
Evincr V T, Hawker C V. Embracing variability in the application of plant soil interactions to the restoration of communities and ecosystems [J]. Restoration Ecology, 2008,16(4):713-729.
Charticr M P, Rostagno C M, Pazos U E. Effects of soil degradation on infiltration rates in grazed semiarid rangclands of Northeastern Patagonia, Argentina [J]. Journal of Arid Environmcnts, 2011,75(7):656-661.
李建兴,何丙辉,徐小军.生物埂护坡下不同土地利用方式对土壤渗透性的影响[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(6):243-248,253.
刘广路,范少辉,漆良华,等.不同类型毛竹林土壤渗透性研究[J].水土保持学报,2008,22(6):44-47.
Pang X Y, Bao W K. Effect of substituting plantation species for native shrubs on the water-holding characteristic of the forest floor on the Eastern of Tibetan Plateau [J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2011,2(3):217-224.
王大力,尹澄清.植物根孔在土壤生态系统中的功能[J].生态学报,2000,20(5):869-874.
吴庆贵,邹利娟,吴福忠,等.涪江流域丘陵区不同植被类型水源涵养功能[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(6):254-258.
吕渡,杨亚辉,赵文慧,等.不同恢复类型植被细根分布及与土壤理化性质的耦合关系[J].生态学报,2018,38(11):3979-3987.
0
浏览量
782
下载量
2
CSCD
关联资源
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
京公网安备11010802024621