Effects of Rock Strata Dip on Soil Infiltration Characteristics in Karst Trough Valley Area

GOU Junfei; ZHANG Linxing; SHI Hailong; GAN Fengling; LIU Juan

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.012

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

Effects of Rock Strata Dip on Soil Infiltration Characteristics in Karst Trough Valley Area

更新时间：2025-03-12

- Effects of Rock Strata Dip on Soil Infiltration Characteristics in Karst Trough Valley Area
- Vol. 37, Issue 4, Pages: 83-93(2023)
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 重庆师范大学三峡库区地表过程与环境遥感重庆市重点实验室,重庆,401331
  2. 三峡库区地表生态过程重庆市野外科学观测研究站,重庆,401331
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.012
  CLC： S157.1
- Published：2023
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
GOU Junfei, ZHANG Linxing, SHI Hailong, et al. Effects of Rock Strata Dip on Soil Infiltration Characteristics in Karst Trough Valley Area[J]. 2023, 37(4): 83-93.
DOI：

GOU Junfei, ZHANG Linxing, SHI Hailong, et al. Effects of Rock Strata Dip on Soil Infiltration Characteristics in Karst Trough Valley Area[J]. 2023, 37(4): 83-93. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.012.

摘要

为了解岩层倾向对喀斯特槽谷区土壤入渗特性的影响

以重庆市青木关岩溶槽谷区顺/逆层坡为研究对象

分析5种典型土地利用方式裸地(AL)、辣椒地(PL)、玉米地(CL)、林地(FL)、草地(GL)在顺/逆层坡的土壤入渗能力差异

并探讨土壤物理性质对土壤入渗能力的影响。结果表明:(1)＞0.25 mm水稳性团聚体含量、毛管持水量、黏粒以及粉粒含量在顺/逆层坡存在显著差异(p<0.05)

其中在>0.25 mm水稳性团聚体含量和毛管持水量方面

分别为PL与FL的顺/逆层坡差异最大

在黏粒和粉粒方面

CL的顺/逆层坡差异最大

且均为逆层坡＞顺层坡。(2)除FL顺层坡的土壤渗透能力低于逆层坡外

其余4种土地利用方式下的土壤入渗能力均表现为顺层坡高于逆层坡。(3)土壤渗透特性在顺/逆层坡均与容重呈极显著负相关关系(p<0.01)

在顺层坡与总孔隙度、非毛管孔隙度、＞5 mm水稳性团聚体含量和饱和持水量呈极显著正相关关系(p<0.01)

在逆层坡与非毛管孔隙度、饱和持水量、粉粒含量呈极显著正相关关系(p<0.01);通过多元逐步回归分析与通径分析发现

顺/逆层坡土壤入渗能力的首要决策因素均为容重

其次分别为>5 mm水稳性团聚体含量和粉粒含量。(4)对比4种土壤入渗过程的拟合模型

Philip模型对顺/逆层坡的土壤入渗过程拟合效果最佳。研究结果可为喀斯特槽谷区不同岩层倾向的水土流失防治以及植被恢复提供数据支撑。

Abstract

In order to understand the impact of rock strata dip on soil infiltration characteristics in karst trough valley area

taking the dip/anti-dip slope of Qingmuguan karst trough valley area in Chongqing as the research object

the differences of soil infiltration capacity of five typical land use patterns

namely abandoned land (AL)

pepper land (PL)

corn land (CL)

forest land (FL)

grassland (GL) in dip/anti-dip slope were analyzed

and the influence of soil physical properties on soil infiltration capacity was discussed. The results showed that: (1) There were significant differences in >0.25 mm water-stable aggregate content

capillary water holding capacity

clay and silt content between the dip and anti-dip slope (p<0.05). In terms of >0.25 mm water-stable aggregate content and capillary water holding capacity

the greatest differences were found between the dip and anti-dip slope of PL and FL

respectively

and in terms of clay and silt content

the greatest differences were found between the dip and anti-dip slope of CL

and both were anti-dip slope > dip slope. (2) Except for the soil infiltration capacity of FL

the soil infiltration capacity of the dip slope was lower than that of the anti-dip slope

and the soil infiltration capacity of the other four land use patterns was higher than that of the anti-dip slope. (3) Soil infiltration characteristics showed highly significant negative correlation with bulk density on dip and anti-dip slope (p<0.01)

and had significantly positive correlation with total porosity

non-capillary porosity

>5 mm water-stable aggregate content and saturated water holding capacity in the dip slope (p<0.01)

and had significantly positive correlation with non-capillary porosity

saturated water holding capacity and silt content in the anti-dip slope (p<0.01). The multiple stepwise regression analysis and path analysis revealed that the primary decision factor for the soil infiltration capacity on dip and anti-dip slope was both the bulk density

followed by >5 mm water-stable aggregate content and silt content

respectively. (4) Compared with the four fitting models of soil infiltration process

Philip model had the best fitting effect on the soil infiltration process of the dip and anti-dip slope. The research results can provide data support for soil erosion control and vegetation restoration in different rock strata dips in karst trough valley area.

关键词

Keywords

references

耿林昇,李红丽,董智,等.放牧对希拉穆仁草原土壤入渗过程影响的定量评估[J].水土保持学报,2022,36(2):70-77.

魏瑶瑶,王俊,张永旺,等.黄土高原不同植被类型土壤入渗特征研究[J].延安大学学报(自然科学版),2021,40(2):16-20.

蒋忙舟.黄土高原典型退耕草地植被特征对土壤入渗过程的影响[J].水土保持学报,2022,36(4):99-104,111.

何苗苗,刘芝芹,王克勤,等.滇池流域不同植被覆盖土壤的入渗特征及其影响因素[J].水土保持学报,2022,36(3):181-187.

Fu T G, Gao H, Liang H Z, et al. Controlling factors of soil saturated hydraulic conductivity in Taihang Mountain Region, northern China[J] Geoderma Regional,2021,26:e00417.

张冠华,易亮,丁文峰,等.三峡库区苔藓生物结皮对土壤水分入渗的影响[J].应用生态学报,2022,33(7):1835-1842.

李建兴,甘凤玲,梅雪梅,等.紫色土区坡耕地不同种植模式对土壤渗透性的影响[J].应用生态学报,2013,24(3):725-731.

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.

Xiao B, Sun F H, Hu K L, et al. Biocrusts reduce surface soil infiltrability and impede soil water infiltration under tension and ponding conditions in dryland ecosystem[J].Journal of Hydrology, 2018,568:792-802.

贾洪杰,甘凤玲,李振轮,等.岩层倾向对南方喀斯特地区坡耕地土壤理化性质的影响[J].生态学报,2019,39(16):6107-6113.

覃自阳,甘凤玲,何丙辉.岩层倾向对喀斯特槽谷区地表/地下产流过程的影响[J].水土保持学报,2020,34(5):68-75,80.

曾江敏,何丙辉,李天阳,等.喀斯特槽谷区不同林草恢复模式下土壤入渗特征[J].水土保持学报,2019,33(4):58-64.

高婵婵,赵传燕,王超,等.黑河上游天老池流域不同植被下土壤理化性质和入渗特征[J].水土保持学报,2016,30(1):117-121,126.

张强.青木关岩溶槽谷地下水水源地固有脆弱性评价[J].中国岩溶,2012,31(1):67-73.

陈英,魏兴萍,雷珊.青木关岩溶槽谷流域不同土地利用类型土壤可蚀性分析[J].中国岩溶,2020,39(6):836-844.

陈英,魏兴萍,张爱国,等.基于复合指纹法的岩溶洼地小流域泥沙来源解析[J].水土保持学报,2020,34(5):131-136,144.

康文蓉,张勇勇,赵文智,等.荒漠绿洲过渡带土壤饱和导水率的空间变异特征[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(5):137-143.

朱列坤,戴全厚,李焱秋,等.喀斯特浅层裂隙土壤入渗特征及其影响因素[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(2):47-54.

Albalasmeh A A, Alghzawi M Z, Gharaibeh M A, et al. Assessment of the effect of irrigation with treated wastewater on soil properties and on the performance of infiltration models[J]Water,2022,14(9):e1520.

王幼奇,阮晓晗,白一茹,等.不同种植年限压砂地土壤水分入渗过程及模型分析[J].排灌机械工程学报,2022,40(10):1048-1055.

吴克宁,赵瑞.土壤质地分类及其在我国应用探讨[J].土壤学报,2019,56(1):227-241.

于群,霍筱东,何剑,等.基于斯皮尔曼相关系数和系统惯量的中国电网停电事故趋势预测.中国电机工程学报:1-12http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.2107.TM.20220824.1625.012.html.

杜家菊,陈志伟.使用SPSS线性回归实现通径分析的方法[J].生物学通报,2010,45(2):4-6.

程汉亭,李勤奋,王晓敏,等.不同植被恢复策略对贵州喀斯特生态系统土壤渗透特性的影响[J].水土保持学报,2020,34(6):110-116.

许胜兵,彭旭东,戴全厚,等.喀斯特高原石漠化区露石岩-土界面与非岩-土界面土壤入渗特性差异[J].水土保持学报,2022,36(5):136-143.

丁康,徐学选,陈文媛,等.长武塬边坡不同植被下土壤团聚体及入渗特征[J].北京林业大学学报,2017,39(12):44-51.

云慧雅,毕华兴,王珊珊,等.不同林分类型土壤理化特征及其对土壤入渗过程的影响[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(6):183-189.

Ma G A, Li G L, Mu X D, et al. Effect of raindrop splashes on topsoil structure and infiltration characteristics[J].Catena,2022,212:e106040.

Zhang Y Y, Zhao W Z, Li X B, et al. Contribution of soil macropores to water infiltration across different land use types in a desert-oasis ecoregion[J].Land Degradation and Developennt,2020,32(4):1751-1760.

张玉琪,梁婷,张德罡,等.祁连山东段退化高寒草甸土壤水分入渗的变化及团聚体对水分入渗的影响[J].草地学报,2020,28(2):500-508.

Fábioc C N, Romain D, Fritz S, et al. Bedrock bedding, landsliding and erosional budgets in the Central European Alps[J].Terra Nova,2015,27(5):370-378.

张志才,陈喜,石朋,等.岩石对喀斯特峰丛山体土壤水分布特征的影响[J].水土保持通报,2008,28(6):41-44.

张磊,王家文,王嘉学,等.滇东喀斯特山原红壤退化过程中剖面颗粒分形特征[J].水土保持研究,2015,22(4):18-23.

Kalhoro S A, Xu X X, Ding K, et al. The effects of different land-uses on soil hydraulic properties in the Loess Plateau, Northern China[J].Land Degradation and Developennt,2018,29(11):3907-3916.

秦川,何丙辉,蒋先军.三峡库区不同土地利用方式下土壤养分含量特征研究[J].草业学报,2016,25(9):10-19.

Ahirwal J, Maiti S K. Assessment of soil properties of different land uses generated due to surface coal mining activities in tropical Sal (

Shorea robusta

) forest, India[J].Catena,2016,140:155-163.

Wang H, Zhang G H, Liu F. et al. Temporal variations in infiltration properties of biological crusts covered soils on the Loess Plateau of China[J].Catena,2017,159:115-125.

李青林,杨静,王琨,等.不同植被类型人工绿地土壤饱和导水能力、持水特征的比较[J].土壤通报,2021,52(4):828-835.

Nie Y P, Chen H S, Wang K L, et al. Rooting characteristics of two widely distributed woody plant species growing in different karst habitats of southwest China[J].Plant Ecology,2014,215:1099-1109.

Views

944

下载量

CSCD

Alert me when the article has been cited

提交

Tools

Publicity Resources

Effect of Rock Strata Dip on Soil Detachment Capacity of Different Land Use Types in Karst Trough Valley Area

Effect of Gravel Content and Particle Size on Soil Infiltration in Low Mountainous Uplan[1]d Region of Western Liaoning Province

Soil Infiltration Characteristics and Influencing Factors of

Effects of Slope Shape and Vegetation Type on Soil Infiltration on Slope in the Loess Area of Xining Basin

Influencing Mechanisms of Plant Roots on Soil Preferential Flow in Loess Hilly-Gully Region

Related Author

JIANG Lisha

GAN Fengling

TAN Xiaohong

SHI Hailong

ZHAO Xuan

PU Junbing

吕刚

王婷

Related Institution

Chongqing Key Laboratory of Surface Process and Ecological Resroration in the Three Gorges Restoration Area, Chongqing Normal University

Chongqing Key Laboratory of Carbon Cycle and Carbon Regulation of Mountain Ecosystem, College of Geography and Tourism Science, Chongqing Normal University

Liaoning Technical University College of Environmental Science and Engineering

Engineering Research Center of Forestry Ecological Engineering, Ministry of Education(Beijing Forestry University)

Beijing Engineering Research Center of Soil and Water Conservation(Beijing Forestry University)

⁰