崇礼清水河流域土壤侵蚀空间格局及其影响因素研究

丁杰; 杨新兵; 朱辰光; 谢建治; 文宏达

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2018.04.012

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

崇礼清水河流域土壤侵蚀空间格局及其影响因素研究

更新时间：2025-03-12

- 崇礼清水河流域土壤侵蚀空间格局及其影响因素研究
- Spatial Pattern and Influence Factors of Soil Erosion of Qingshui River Basin in Chongli
- 水土保持学报 2018年32卷第4期页码：73-80
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 河北农业大学林学院, 河北省林木种质资源与森林保护重点实验室,河北,保定,071000
  2. 河北农业大学资源与环境科学学院,河北,保定,071000
- 作者简介：
  
  [ "丁杰(1992-),女,河北固安人,硕士研究生,主要从事水土保持研究。E-mail:yixuandj@163.com" ]
- 基金信息：
  
  国家水体污染控制与治理科技重大专项"海河北系永定河—洋河段水污染控制与水质改善技术集成与综合示范"（2015ZX07203-005）子课题"关键支流清水河水环境保护与防治技术集成与示范（2015ZX07203-005-02）
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2018.04.012
  中图分类号：
- 纸质出版：2018
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
丁杰, 杨新兵, 朱辰光, 等. 崇礼清水河流域土壤侵蚀空间格局及其影响因素研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2018,32(4):73-80.

DING Jie, YANG Xinbing, ZHU Chenguang, et al. Spatial Pattern and Influence Factors of Soil Erosion of Qingshui River Basin in Chongli[J]. 2018, 32(4): 73-80.
丁杰, 杨新兵, 朱辰光, 等. 崇礼清水河流域土壤侵蚀空间格局及其影响因素研究[J]. 水土保持学报, 2018,32(4):73-80. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2018.04.012.

DING Jie, YANG Xinbing, ZHU Chenguang, et al. Spatial Pattern and Influence Factors of Soil Erosion of Qingshui River Basin in Chongli[J]. 2018, 32(4): 73-80. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2018.04.012.

摘要

基于DEM数字高程模型并结合RUSLE模型应用GIS、GeoDa、GS+等软件分析了河北省张家口市崇礼区25年间土壤侵蚀空间格局演变及影响因素。结果表明：（1）1990—2015年，研究区中部、西部和西南部土壤侵蚀较严重，土壤侵蚀强度以轻度、中度为主，土壤侵蚀量呈先减少后增加的趋势。（2）1990—2000年，土壤侵蚀强度转变以轻度侵蚀转入为主，土壤侵蚀状况减轻；2000—2010年，土壤侵蚀由微度侵蚀转为高级别侵蚀，侵蚀程度呈严重趋势；2010—2015年，总体表现为微度侵蚀、轻度侵蚀转向高级别侵蚀，但侵蚀增加面积有所减少，侵蚀状况稍有改善。（3）土壤侵蚀Moran’s I>0，空间分布呈正相关性，表现为聚集状态，以高高型聚集为主，主要集中在崇礼区中西部和西南部。土壤侵蚀模数符合指数模型和球状模型，R2为0.943~0.979。变程A先由3 870 m减小到860 m再增加至1 470 m，表明1990—2015年土壤侵蚀变化先快后慢，空间相关性分布范围由小变大，空间异质性呈先增强后减弱趋势。分形维数（FD）介于1.922~1.971，在区域较小空间尺度下，土壤侵蚀空间异质性主要是由植被覆盖、土地利用类型、水土保持措施等随机因子引起的。（4）土壤侵蚀影响因子中前3个主成分贡献率占到89.215 0%。在第1主成分载荷中，植被覆盖因子向量投影长度最大，为0.976 4。在第2，3主成分载荷中，水土保持措施因子、土壤可蚀性因子向量投影长度较大。因此，崇礼区土壤侵蚀影响因素大小依次为植被覆盖因子（C）、水土保持措施因子（P）、土壤可蚀性因子（K）、降雨侵蚀力因子（R）、坡长坡度因子（LS）。研究结果可为崇礼区清水河流域水土综合治理和可持续发展提供理论依据。

Abstract

Based on DEM digital elevation model

RUSLE model combined with GIS

GeoDa

GS+ and other software

the evolution of spatial pattern of soil erosion and its influencing factors in 25 years in Chongli District

Zhangjiakou City

Hebei Province were analyzed. The results showed that:(1) From 1990 to 2015

the soil erosion was severe in the central

western

and southwestern regions of the study area. The intensity of soil erosion was mainly mild and moderate. The amount of soil erosion firstly decreased and then increased. (2) From 1990 to 2000

the change of soil erosion intensity was dominated by mild transformation. Soil erosion was alleviated. From 2000 to 2010

it was mainly slight erosion turning to high-level erosion

and showed aggravate trend. From 2010 to 2015

the overall transformation was in the form of slight erosion

mild erosion turned to high erosion levels

but the area of increased erosion decreased

and the erosion slightly improved. (3) Soil erosion's Moran's I>0

the spatial distribution was positive correlation

showing aggregation state

with high-level aggregation mainly in central and western and southwest. Soil erosion modulus met index model and spherical model

R2 was 0.943~0.979. The range of soil erosion reduced from 3 870 m to 860 m and then increased to 1 470 m

indicating that the change of soil erosion was firstly fast and then slow down from 1990 to 2015

the spatial distribution of spatial correlation expanded and the spatial heterogeneity increased firstly and then decreased. The fractal dimension of soil erosion ranged from 1.922 to 1.971. Spatial heterogeneity of soil erosion was mainly caused by stochastic factors such as vegetation cover

land use types

and water and soil conservation measures in a small spatial scale. (4) The contribution rate of the first

second

and third principal components to the soil erosion factors accounted for 89.215 0%. In the first principal component load

the projection length of vegetation cover factor was the largest

which was 0.976 4. In the second and third principal component loads

the projection length of soil and water conservation measures factor and soil erodibility factor were large. Therefore

the influencing factors of soil erosion in Chongli District were in order of vegetation cover factor

soil and water conservation measures factor

soil erodibility factor

rainfall erosivity factor

and slope length slope factor. The results can provide theoretical basis for soil and water management and sustainable development of Qingshui River Basin in Chongli District.

关键词

Keywords

references

余新晓,毕华兴.水土保持学[M].3版.北京:中国林业出版社,2013.

张洪江,程金花.土壤侵蚀原理[M].3版.北京:科学出版社,2014.

俱战省,安邦,严冬春,等.三峡库区小流域修正通用土壤流失方程适用性分析[J].农业工程学报,2015,31(5):121-131.

Cerdà A, Jordán A, Zavala L, et al. The contribution of mulches to control high soil erosion rates in vineyards in Eastern Spain[J]. EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts,2014,16:16127.

中华人民共和国水利部.第一次全国水利普查水土保持情况公报[J].中国水土保持,2013(10):2-3.

Wischmeier W H, Smith D D. Predicting rainfall erosion losses:A guide to conservation planning[J]. United States.dept.of Agriculture.agriculture Handbook, 1978:537.

De Roo A P J, Offermans R J E, Cremers N H D T. Lisem:A single-event, physically based hydrological and soil erosion model for drainage basins. ii:Sensitivity analysis, validation and application[J]. Hydrological Processes,2015,10(8):1119-1126.

Morgan R P C, Quinton J N, Smith R E, et al. The European Soil Erosion Model (EUROSEM):A dynamic approach for predicting sediment transport from fields and small catchments[J]. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms,2015,23(6):527-544.

Laflen J M, Lane L J, Foster G R. WEPP:A new generation of erosion prediction technology[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation,1991,46(1):34-38.

Zokaib S, Naser G. Impacts of land uses on runoff and soil erosion:A case study in Hilkot watershed Pakistan[J]. International Journal of Sediment Research,2011,26(3):343-352.

Renard K G, Foster G R, Weesies G A, et al. Predicting soil erosion by water:A guide to conservation planning with the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)[M]. Washington DC:Agriculture Handbook, 1997.

查良松,邓国徽,谷家川.1992-2013年巢湖流域土壤侵蚀动态变化[J].地理学报,2015,70(11):1708-1719.

Farhan Y, Zregat D, Farhan I. Spatial estimation of soil erosion risk using RUSLE approach, RS, and GIS techniques:A case study of Kufranja watershed, northern Jordan[J]. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 2013,5(12):1247-1261.

徐亚莉,罗明良,梁倍瑜,等.DEM空间插值方法对土壤侵蚀模拟的影响研究:以USPED分析干热河谷典型冲沟为例[J].地理科学进展,2016,35(7):870-877.

滕洪芬.基于多源信息的潜在土壤侵蚀估算与数字制图研究.杭州:浙江大学,2017.

徐建华.现代地理学中的数学方法[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1996.

Anselin L. Local indicators of spatial association:LISA[J]. Geographical Analysis,1995,27(2):93-115.

中华人民共和国水利部.土壤侵蚀分类分级标准(SL 190-2007)[S].北京:中国水利水电出版社,2008.

张法升,刘作新.分形理论及其在土壤空间变异研究中的应用[J].应用生态学报,2011,22(5):1351-1358.

李夫星.基于USLE模型的河北省土壤侵蚀评价研究.石家庄:河北师范大学,2013.

蒋好忱.流域土壤侵蚀评价中的河流拓扑分析.西安:西北大学,2014.

赵串串,杨晶晶,刘龙,等.青海省黄土丘陵区沟壑侵蚀影响因子与侵蚀量的相关性分析[J].干旱区资源与环境,2014,28(4):22-27.

邬铃莉,杨文涛,王云琦,等.基于WEPP模型的水土保持措施因子与侵蚀量关系研究[J].土壤通报,2017,48(4):955-960.

浏览量

1330

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

小流域土壤侵蚀模型（SWEM）

秦岭水源地生态恢复下土壤全氮分布对侵蚀的响应

人工模拟降雨下高寒区坡面径流水动力特性对砾石覆盖的响应

水力条件对不同地表粗糙度土壤分离能力的影响

三峡库区生态屏障区土壤侵蚀时空变化特征与驱动因素