Response of Runoff and Sediment Yield to Biological Measures on Slopes Under Different Erosive Rain Patterns in Southern Guizhou

HUANG Kai; LI Rui; LI Yong; SONG Tao; QIN Li; LIU Zhongxian

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.06.003

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

Response of Runoff and Sediment Yield to Biological Measures on Slopes Under Different Erosive Rain Patterns in Southern Guizhou

更新时间：2025-03-12

- Response of Runoff and Sediment Yield to Biological Measures on Slopes Under Different Erosive Rain Patterns in Southern Guizhou
- Vol. 34, Issue 6, Pages: 14-21(2020)
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 贵州师范大学喀斯特研究院,贵阳,550001
  2. 国家喀斯特石漠化防治工程技术研究中心,贵阳,550001
  3. 贵州省水土保持监测站,贵阳,550002
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.06.003
  CLC： S157.1
- Published：2020
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
HUANG Kai, LI Rui, LI Yong, et al. Response of Runoff and Sediment Yield to Biological Measures on Slopes Under Different Erosive Rain Patterns in Southern Guizhou[J]. 2020, 34(6): 14-21.
DOI：

HUANG Kai, LI Rui, LI Yong, et al. Response of Runoff and Sediment Yield to Biological Measures on Slopes Under Different Erosive Rain Patterns in Southern Guizhou[J]. 2020, 34(6): 14-21. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.06.003.

摘要

为探讨不同降雨条件下的生物措施对坡面产流产沙特征的影响，分析了贵州省黔南自治州云雾水土保持监测站2014—2017年4年6个小区104次侵蚀性降雨下的实测产流产沙数据。结果表明：（1）侵蚀性降雨按历时、雨强和雨量可分为3类，包括A雨型（中历时、中雨强、中雨量），B雨型（长历时、小雨强、大雨量），C雨型（短历时、大雨强、小雨量）。C雨型为引起区域水土流失的主要雨型。（2）较坡耕地而言，A雨型和C雨型条件下减流量均呈水平阶整地+经果林 > 水保林 > 人工草地 > 自然恢复草地 > 经果林的趋势；减沙量均为水平阶整地+经果林 > 人工草地 > 水保林 > 自然恢复草地 > 经果林。B雨型减流量为水平阶整地+经果林 > 自然恢复草地 > 水保林 > 人工草地 > 经果林；减沙量为水平阶整地+经果林 > 自然恢复草地 > 人工草地 > 水保林 > 经果林。除自然恢复草地外B型雨条件下各措施对水土流失的调控作用不如A雨型和C雨型。不同措施对坡面产沙量的调控作用优于产流量，自然恢复草地在B型雨下具有良好的水土保持效果。（3）坡耕地水土流失最为严重，多年平均土壤侵蚀模数为365.33 t/（km2·a），水平阶整地+经果林措施水土保持效果最优，其土壤侵蚀模数为3 t/（km2·a），较坡耕地可降低土壤侵蚀率达99.2%。同时，水平阶整地+经果林措施在A、B、C雨型下较坡耕地可分别减少产流62.7%，53.0%和63.2%。（4）坡面产流同降雨一样，集中在5—8月；C雨型与产沙量集中分布在5—6月。根据研究结果，研究区每年的5—8月为水土流失高发期，尤其是5，6月，这个时段应为水土流失治理的重点时段，在治理同时要针对不同雨型条件采取不同生物治理措施，并且要对C雨型进行重点防范。

Abstract

In order to explore the soil and water conservation benefit of different ecological restoration measures on sloping land under different rainfall conditions

this study analyzed the runoff and sediment under six ecological restoration measures (Ecological restoration grassland

ERG; Level terrace and preparation+fruit forest

LF; Fruit forest

FF; Sloping land

SL; Cultivated pastures

CP; Soil and water conservation forest

SWF) under the 104 erosive rainfalls. The observation data from 2014 to 2017 of runoff plots located in the Yunwu Water and soil conservation monitoring station

Guizhou province were used. The results showed that: (1) According to rainfall duration

rainfall intensity and rainfall

erosive rainfall could be divided into three types: A-type (medium duration

medium rainfall intensity and medium rainfall); B-type (long duration

light rainfall intensity and large rainfall); C-type (short duration

heavy rainfall intensity and small rainfall)

and C-type was the main cause of regional soil erosion. (2) Compared with sloping farmland

the runoff reduction under the A-type and C-type showed the trend of LF > SWF > CP > ERG > FF

and the sediment reduction showed the trend of LF > CP > SWF > ERG > FF. The runoff reduction under the B-type showed the trend of LF > ERG > SWF > CP > FF

and the sediment reduction showed the trend of LF > ERG > CP > SWF > FF. Except ERG

the control effect of different measures on soil and water loss under A-type and C-type was better than that B-type. The control effect of different measures on slope sediment yield was better than that of runoff. ERG had good soil and water conservation effect under B-type. (3) The soil erosion of sloping land was the most serious. Compared with sloping farmland

the runoff reduction rate of LF was 62.7%

53.0% and 63.2% under A-type

B-type and C-type respectively. The soil erosion modulus of LF was 3 t/(km2·a)

which could reduce the soil erosion rate by 99.2% compared with the sloping farmland. (4) Slope runoff and rainfall were concentrated from May to August. Slope sediment and C-type were concentrated in May and June.

关键词

Keywords

references

Zhang J X, Zhang D Y, Liu W F, et al. Progress in research on land use and soil erosion in the Loess Plateau of China[J].IOP Conference Series:Earth and Environmental Science,2019,242(5). DOI:10.1088/1755-1315/242/5/052021.

李占斌,朱冰冰,李鹏.土壤侵蚀与水土保持研究进展[J].土壤学报,2008,45(5):802-809.

张攀,姚文艺,刘国彬,等.土壤复合侵蚀研究进展与展望[J].农业工程学报,2019,35(24):154-161.

Lal R. Soil erosion and the global carbon budget[J].Environment International,2003,29(4):437-450.

王世杰,李阳兵,李瑞玲.喀斯特石漠化的形成背景、演化与治理[J].第四纪研究,2003,23(6):657-666.

吕明辉,王红亚,蔡运龙.西南喀斯特地区土壤侵蚀研究综述[J].地理科学进展,2007,26(2):87-96.

熊康宁,李晋,龙明忠.典型喀斯特石漠化治理区水土流失特征与关键问题[J].地理学报,2012,67(7):878-888.

戴全厚,严友进.西南喀斯特石漠化与水土流失研究进展[J].水土保持学报,2018,32(2):1-10.

刘晓达,郭泺,李冬冬.黔南布依族苗族自治州生态环境敏感性评价与区划[J].国土与自然资源研究,2013,(6):25-28.

罗娅,杨胜天,刘晓燕,等.黄土高原次降雨径流产沙变化及其与雨强和植被盖度变化的相关性[J].干旱区研究,2015,32(4):698-709.

王占礼,靳雪艳,马春艳,等.黄土坡面降雨产流产沙过程及其响应关系研究[J].水土保持学报,2008,22(2):24-28.

刘晓燕,刘昌明,党素珍.黄土丘陵区雨强对水流含沙量的影响[J].地理学报,2019,74(9):1723-1732.

焦剑,谢云,林燕,等.东北地区降雨-径流侵蚀力研究[J].中国水土保持科学,2009,7(3):6-11.

钟科元,郑粉莉,吴红艳,等.松花江流域极端降雨变化对流域输沙量的影响[J].农业机械学报,2017,48(8):245-252,321.

Qi X K, Wang K L, Zhang C H. Effectiveness of ecological restoration projects in a karst region of southwest China assessed using vegetation succession mapping[J].Ecological Engineering,2013,54:245-253.

Tong X W, Wang K L, Yue Y M. Quantifying the effectiveness of ecological restoration projects on long-term vegetation dynamics in the karst regions of Southwest China[J].International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation,2017,54:105-113.

李安定,喻理飞.贵州省喀斯特区基于林木耗水特征的顶坛花椒造林整地技术[J].中国岩溶,2009,28(2):189-193.

高敏,王勇,高洁,等.喀斯特地区退耕还林工程下生态系统服务变化与关系分析[J].水土保持研究,2020,27(2):276-283.

祝超伟,倪九派,余佳音,等.岩溶槽谷区坡改梯与自然地块生产对比[J].农业工程,2013,3(3):85-87.

王红梅,谢应忠,王堃,等.宁夏南部半干旱黄土丘陵区草地土壤水分物理特性研究[J].农业科学研究,2007,28(3):5-9.

Lal R. Soil erosion on Alfisols in Western Nigeria:Ⅲ. Effects of rainfall characteristics[J].Geoderma,1976,16(5):389-401.

Ran Q H, Su D Y, Li P, et al. Experimental study of the impact of rainfall characteristics on runoff generation and soil erosion[J].Journal of Hydrology,2012,425(6):99-111.

尹忠东,周心澄,朱金兆.影响水土流失的主要因素研究概述[J].世界林业研究,2003,16(3):32-36.

张黎明,林金石,于东升,等.南方不同类型土壤侵蚀量与降雨各因子的关系研究[J].水土保持通报,2011,31(2):10-14.

郑粉莉,边锋,卢嘉,等.雨型对东北典型黑土区顺坡垄作坡面土壤侵蚀的影响[J].农业机械学报,2016,47(2):90-97.

罗键,尹忠,郑子成,等.不同降雨条件下紫色土横垄坡面地表微地形变化特征[J].中国农业科学,2016,49(16):3162-3173.

杜波,唐丽霞,潘佑静,等.贵州喀斯特地区侵蚀性次降雨产流产沙特征研究[J].西南林业大学学报,2016,36(5):111-117.

谭顺菊,高华端,代裕.羊鸡冲小流域主要雨型对砂页岩坡耕地土壤侵蚀的影响[J].中国水土保持,2016(4):44-47.

秦伟,左长清,晏清洪,等,红壤裸露坡地次降雨土壤侵蚀规律[J].农业工程学报,2015,31(2):124-132.

焦菊英,王万中,郝小品.黄土高原不同类型暴雨的降水侵蚀特征[J].干旱区资源与环境,1999,13(1):35-43.

柏勇,杜静,杨婷婷,等.不同水土保持措施对石漠化区水土流失的影响[J].中国水土保持科学,2018,16(2):106-113.

Views

1344

下载量

CSCD

Alert me when the article has been cited

提交

Tools

Publicity Resources

Characteristics of Nitrogen Export and the Effects of Rainfall during the Rainy Season in a Karst Small Catchment

Effects of Vegetation Root Distribution on Preferential Flow Characteristics in Woodland and Grassland of Karst Areas

Characteristics and Ecological Functions of Water Conservation in Karst Regions of Southwest China

Extraction and Analysis of Microtopographic Features of Crop-Covered Slopes Based on SfM-MVS

Effects of Continuous Rainfall and Runoff under Different Slope Conditions on Hillslope Soil Erosion in the Black Soil Region

Related Author

ZENG Jie1

WU Qinxin1

ZHANG Han

CHENG Jinhua

WANG Jiao

SHI Xueqi

WANG Shijie

Related Institution

Key Laboratory of Karst Environment and Geohazard, Ministry of Land and Resources, Guizhou University

Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences

School of Geographical and Earth Sciences, University of Glasgow

School of Soil and Water Conservation， Beijing Forestry University

Beijing Shuimu Fangze Ecological Technology Co. Ltd.

⁰