兰州市北山削山造地的土壤质量变化评价

任秀子; 王龙; 徐学选; 张连科

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2023.04.008

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

兰州市北山削山造地的土壤质量变化评价

试验研究

- 兰州市北山削山造地的土壤质量变化评价
- Evaluation on Soil Quality Changes due to Land from Hill Cutting in Beishan Mountain in Lanzhou City
- 水土保持通报 2023年43卷第4期页码：61-67
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 西北农林科技大学草业与草原学院, 陕西杨凌,712100
  2. 北京良乡蓝鑫水利工程设计有限公司,北京,102488
  3. 中国科学院水利部水土保持研究所, 陕西杨凌,712100
  4. 甘肃省科学院地质自然灾害防治研究所,甘肃,兰州,730000
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目“黄土丘陵区土壤斥水性及其对降水入渗机制的影响研究”(41977426);甘肃省科学院应用研究与开发项目“马兰黄土边坡土壤侵蚀降雨模拟研究”(JK-2019-07)
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2023.04.008
  中图分类号： S157.2
- 纸质出版：2023
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
任秀子, 王龙, 徐学选, 等. 兰州市北山削山造地的土壤质量变化评价[J]. 水土保持通报, 2023,43(4):61-67.

Ren Xiuzi, Wang Long, Xu Xuexuan, et al. Evaluation on Soil Quality Changes due to Land from Hill Cutting in Beishan Mountain in Lanzhou City[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2023, 43(4): 61-67.
任秀子, 王龙, 徐学选, 等. 兰州市北山削山造地的土壤质量变化评价[J]. 水土保持通报, 2023,43(4):61-67. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2023.04.008.

Ren Xiuzi, Wang Long, Xu Xuexuan, et al. Evaluation on Soil Quality Changes due to Land from Hill Cutting in Beishan Mountain in Lanzhou City[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2023, 43(4): 61-67. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2023.04.008.

摘要

[目的] 评价兰州市北山削山造地引起的土壤质量变化，旨在为该区削山造地工程和生态效益评价提供科学依据和建议。[方法] 选择兰州市城关区北山原有耕地、林地、草地、削山产生的新造地4种土地利用方式，采集土壤物理性质、化学性质和根系生物量样品，基于主成分分析法(principal component analysis， PCA)筛选出最小数据集(minimum data set， MDS)，通过土壤质量指数对兰州市北山土壤质量进行评价。[结果] ①基于包括12项理化指标的土壤质量全数据集(total data set， TDS)的主成分分析，构建了由容重、速效磷、速效钾、全氮、pH值组成的最小数据集。②兰州市北山4种土地利用方式下土壤质量指数排序为：耕地＞林地＞新造地＞草地，削山造地显著影响了土壤的水分保持、有机质积累、全氮、速效钾含量等。③最小数据集和全数据集之间相关性系数为0.66，最小数据集能够较好地进行土壤质量评价(p＜0.01)。[结论] 兰州市北山的耕地和林地具有更好的土壤质量，新造地土壤的持水与积累养分能力低于原有耕地和林地，是未来植被恢复和重建的重点区域。削山造地时应尽量安排在草地上进行，注意对原有耕地和林地的保护。

Abstract

[Objective] The soil quality changes caused by land from hill citting in Beishan Mountain in Lanzhou City were assessed in order to provide a scientific basis and suggestions for land-cutting and land-reclamation projects and ecological benefit evaluation in this area. [Methods] We selected four land use types for evaluation: original cultivated land

forest land

grassland

and newly reclaimed land created by mountain cutting in Beishan Mountain of Chengguan District

Lanzhou City. We collected soil physical properties

chemical properties

and root biomass samples. We screened the minimum data set based on principal component analysis (PCA)

and evaluated the soil quality of Beishan Mountain through the soil quality index. [Results] ① Based on the principal component analysis of the full data set of soil quality (including 12 physical and chemical indicators)

a minimum data set consisting of bulk density

available phosphorus

available potassium

total nitrogen

and pH value was constructed. ② Soil quality index for the four land use types followed the order of cultivated land＞forest land＞newly reclaimed land＞grassland. Hill cutting significantly affected soil water conservation

organic matter accumulation

total nitrogen

available potassium

etc. ③ The correlation coefficient between the minimum data set and the full data set was 0.66

and the minimum data set better evaluated soil quality (p＜0.01). [Conclusion] Cultivated land and forest land in Beishan Mountain had better soil quality than grassland and newly reclaimed land. Water holding capacity and nutrient accumulation capacity of newly reclaimed land was lower than that of cultivated land and forest land

which is a key area for future vegetation restoration and reconstruction. Land cutting on mountains should take place on grasslands as far as possible

and attentions should be given to the protection of original cultivated land and forest land.

关键词

Keywords

references

张明泉,纪淑娜,孙年祥.兰州削山填沟整地工程主要环境影响及防治对策[J].干旱区资源与环境,2009,23(3):77-82.

马蕾.削山造城之生态影响的论战及思考:以兰州新城为例[J].现代城市研究,2016,31(6):85-90.

Doran J W, Zeiss M R. Soil health and sustainability: Managing the biotic component of soil quality [J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2000,15(1):3-11.

Doran J W, Stamatiadis S I, Haberern J. Soil health as an indicator of sustainable management [J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2002,88(2):107-110.

Larson W E, Pierce F J. The dynamics of soil quality as a measure of sustainable management [J].Soil Science, 1994,551(1):37-51

Dalsgaard K. Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment [J]. Geoderma, 1995,66(1):44-46.

Andrews S S, Karlen D L, Mitchell J P. A comparison of soil quality indexing methods for vegetable production systems in Northern California [J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 2002,90(1):25-45.

李鑫,张文菊,邬磊,等.土壤质量评价指标体系的构建及评价方法[J].中国农业科学,2021,54(14):3043-3056.

Rezaei S A, Gilkes R J, Andrews S S. A minimum data set for assessing soil quality in rangelands [J]. Geoderma, 2006,136(1):229-234.

Rahmanipour F, Marzaioli R, Bahrami H A, et al. Assessment of soil quality indices in agricultural lands of Qazvin Province, Iran [J]. Ecological Indicators, 2014,40:19-26.

Li Peiyue, Qian Hui, Wu Jianhua. Environment: Accelerate research on land creation [J]. Nature, 2014,510(7503):29-31.

彭建,谢盼,刘焱序,等.低丘缓坡建设开发综合生态风险评价及发展权衡:以大理白族自治州为例[J].地理学报,2015,70(11):1747-1761.

鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000.

唐庄生,安慧,上官周平.荒漠草原沙漠化对土壤养分与植被根冠比的影响[J].草地学报,2015,23(3):463-468.

Woods K D. Dynamics in late-successional hemlock-hardwood forests over three decades [J]. Ecology, 2000,81(1):110-126.

An Shaoshan, Huang Yimei, Zheng Fenli. Evaluation of soil microbial indices along a revegetation chronosequence in grassland soils on the Loess Plateau, Northwest China [J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2008,41(3):286-292.

Bambo S K, Nowak J, Blount A R, et al. Soil nitrate leaching in silvopastures compared with open pasture and pine plantation [J]. Journal of Environmental Quality, 2009,38(5):1870-1877.

Nyakatawa E Z, Mays D A, Naka K, et al. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus dynamics in a loblolly pine-goat silvopasture system in the Southeast USA [J]. Agroforestry Systems, 2012,86(2):129-140.

刘利昆,赵广举,穆兴民,等.基于最小数据集的青藏公路沿线土壤质量评价[J].水土保持研究,2022,29(2):126-131.

Delgado M E M, Canters F. Modeling the impacts of agroforestry systems on the spatial patterns of soil erosion risk in three catchments of Claveria, the Philippines [J]. Agroforestry Systems, 2012,85(3):411-423.

彭斌,许伟,邵荣,等.不同生境种源盐地碱蓬幼苗生长发育对盐分胁迫的响应和适应[J].草业学报,2016,25(4):81-90.

蒋丛泽,受娜,高玮,等.青藏高原东北缘不同土地利用类型土壤质量综合评价[J].应用生态学报,2022,33(12):3279-3286.

李霞,朱万泽,舒树淼,等.基于主成分分析的大渡河中游干暖河谷草地土壤质量评价[J].生态学报,2021,41(10):3891-3900.

梅楠,谷岩,李德忠,等.基于最小数据集的吉林省黑土耕层土壤质量评价[J].农业工程学报,2021,37(12):91-98.

李桂林,陈杰,檀满枝,等.基于土地利用变化建立土壤质量评价最小数据集[J].土壤学报,2008,45(1):16-25.

信忠保,余新晓,张满良,等.黄土高原丘陵沟壑区不同土地利用的土壤养分特征[J].干旱区研究,2012,29(3):379-384.

张正杨.植烟土壤肥力变异特征研究[D].河南郑州：河南农业大学,2008.

Karlen D L, Mausbach M J, Doran J W, et al. Soil quality: A concept, definition, and framework for evaluation (a guest editorial) [J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1997,61(1):4-10.

张灵,王绪芳,王春燕,等.兰州市南北两山土壤养分空间分布及其影响因子[J].兰州大学学报(自然科学版),2007,43(3):53-57.

赵同谦,赵阳,贺玉晓,等.不同植被恢复类型对矿山废弃地土壤理化性质的影响:以焦作缝山公园为例[J].河南理工大学学报(自然科学版),2017,36(4):60-67.

王岩,李玉灵,石娟华,等.不同植被恢复模式对铁尾矿物种多样性及土壤理化性质的影响[J].水土保持学报,2012,26(3):112-117.

阿丽娅·阿力木,丛小涵,夏晓莹,等.不同土地利用方式下土壤养分特征变化分析[J].新疆农业科学,2022,59(4):925-933.

郭鑫,高永,张超,等.不同植被恢复类型对煤炭物流园区废弃地土壤理化性质的影响[J].水土保持通报,2022,42(2):67-73.

刘畅,张建军,张海博,等.晋西黄土区退耕还林后土壤入渗特征及土壤质量评价[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(5):101-107.

浏览量

636

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

改良剂对秦巴山区新造耕地土壤质量的影响

改土材料对鄂尔多斯满来梁露天矿排土场风沙土理化性质的影响

基于RS和GIS的河谷型城市土地利用变化及生态环境效应研究

毛乌素沙地东南缘沙漠化过程中土壤理化性质分析