干热河谷冲沟发育区土壤细沟可蚀性及主要影响因素

何周窈; 苏正安; 王勇; 周涛; 王俊杰; 王晓艺

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.03.002

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

干热河谷冲沟发育区土壤细沟可蚀性及主要影响因素

更新时间：2025-03-12

- 干热河谷冲沟发育区土壤细沟可蚀性及主要影响因素
- Erodibility and Main Influencing Factors of Soil Rill in Gully Development Area of Dry-hot Valley
- 水土保持学报 2020年34卷第3期页码：8-13
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 中国科学院水利部成都山地灾害与环境研究所, 中国科学院山地灾害与地表过程重点实验室,成都,610041
  2. 四川农业大学林学院,成都,611130
  3. 四川农业大学水利水电学院,四川,雅安,625014
  4. 中国科学院大学,北京,100049
- 作者简介：
  
  [ "何周窈(1994-),女,硕士研究生,主要从事植被恢复和生态效益研究。E-mail:thezhouyaom@163.com" ]
- 基金信息：
  
  国家重点研发计划项目（2017YFC0505102）国家重大基础研究项目（973项目）（2015CB452704）四川省应用基础研究科技计划项目（2018JY0034）四川省重大科技专项（2018SZDZX0034）
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.03.002
  中图分类号： S157.1
- 纸质出版：2020
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
何周窈, 苏正安, 王勇, 等. 干热河谷冲沟发育区土壤细沟可蚀性及主要影响因素[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020,34(3):8-13.

HE Zhouyao, SU Zhengan, WANG Yong, et al. Erodibility and Main Influencing Factors of Soil Rill in Gully Development Area of Dry-hot Valley[J]. 2020, 34(3): 8-13.
何周窈, 苏正安, 王勇, 等. 干热河谷冲沟发育区土壤细沟可蚀性及主要影响因素[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020,34(3):8-13. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.03.002.

HE Zhouyao, SU Zhengan, WANG Yong, et al. Erodibility and Main Influencing Factors of Soil Rill in Gully Development Area of Dry-hot Valley[J]. 2020, 34(3): 8-13. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.03.002.

摘要

为探明我国干热河谷区不同活跃程度冲沟不同空间部位土壤细沟可蚀性（Kr值）在不同近地表水文条件下的差异，在云南省元谋县选择不同活跃程度的冲沟，采集其不同空间部位（集水区、沟壁、沟床）的土壤样品，利用"V"形细沟模拟冲刷装置进行放水冲刷试验，流量设置为150，300，450，600，750，900 mL/min，分别进行排水、饱和、渗流3种水文状态的模拟试验。结果表明：（1）干热河谷冲沟发育区土壤砂粒含量明显高于粉粒和黏粒，占50%以上，土壤有机质（SOM）和全氮（TN）含量较低；（2）不同活跃程度冲沟土壤机械组成、有机质含量之间均存在显著差异，且随着冲沟稳定性增加，土壤砂粒含量呈逐渐降低趋势，土壤粉粒、黏粒、SOM、TN含量则呈不同程度的增加趋势；（3）在不同近地表水文状态下，土壤Kr值（s/m）均随冲沟稳定性的增加而呈递减趋势，表现为Kr（活跃型） > Kr（半稳定型） > Kr（稳定型），而不同活跃度冲沟土壤临界剪切力τc值之间具有一定差异性，但无明显规律；（4）冲沟不同部位土壤Kr值之间也具有显著的空间异质性，表现Kr（集水区） < Kr（沟壁） < Kr（沟床）；（5）随着近地表水文条件由排水状态转变为饱和、渗流状态，冲沟发育区不同空间部位的土壤Kr值均显著增加。综上可见，冲沟活跃程度（植被恢复程度）、近地表水文条件、土壤机械组成和有机质含量等均会对干热河谷冲沟发育区土壤可蚀性产生显著影响。

Abstract

In order to find out the difference of soil rill erodibility (Kr value) under different near-surface hydrological conditions in different spatial parts of gullies with different active degrees in dry-hot valleys of China

different active gullies were selected in Yuanmou County of Yunnan Province

and soil samples of different spatial parts (upstream catchment area

gully wall and gully bed) were collected

and the "V" type rill simulation scour device was used to carry out drainage scour experiment under three hydrological conditions (drainage

saturation and seepage)

the flow rates were set as 150

300

450

600

750 and 900 mL/min. The results showed that: (1) In gully development area of dry-hot valley

the content of soil sand was significantly higher than that of silt and clay

accounting for more than 50%

and the content of soil organic matter (SOM) and total nitrogen (TN) was relatively low. (2) There were significant differences in mechanical composition and organic matter content among gullies with different active degrees

as the gully stability increased

the soil sand content gradually decreased

while the content of silt

clay

SOM and TN increased. (3) Under different near-surface hydrological conditions

as the gully stability increased

the soil rill erodibility (Kr value

s/m) of gully decreased

which followed the order of Kr (active type) > Kr (semi-stable type) > Kr (stable type). In addition

an obvious difference in soil critical shear force (τc

Pa) appeared in gullies with different activity degrees

while no obvious change tendency could be found. (4) Significant differences in Kr values could be found in the different parts of gully

which followed the order of Kr (upstream catchment area) < Kr (gully wall) < Kr (gully bed). (5) With the change of near-surface hydrological conditions from drainage state to saturation and seepage state

values of Kr in the different spatial parts of gully increased significantly. In conclusion

gully activity (vegetation restoration condition)

near-surface hydrological condition

soil particle size fraction and content of SOM could obviously affected soil erodibility in the gully developed areas of dry-hot valley.

关键词

Keywords

references

钟祥浩.干热河谷区生态系统退化及恢复与重建途径[J].长江流域资源与环境,2000,9(3):376-383.

刘刚才,邓伟,文安邦,等.试论金沙江河谷建立沟蚀崩塌科学观测研究站的重要性及学科方向[J].山地学报,2010,28(3):333-340.

朱显谟.黄土地区植被因素对于水土流失的影响[J].土壤学报,1960(2):110-121.

Olson T C, Wischmeier W H. Soil erodibility evaluations for soils on the runoff and erosion stations[J]. Soil Science Society of American Proceedings,1963,27(5):590-592.

An J, Zheng F L, Lu J, et al. Investigating the role of raindrop impact on hydrodynamic mechanism of soil erosion under simulated rainfall conditions[J].Soil Science,2012,177(8):517-526.

Pathenlades E. Erosion and deposition of cohesive soils[J].Journal of the Hydraulics Division,1965,9(1):48-53.

Nearing M A, Bradford J M, Parker S C. Soil detachment by shallow flow at low slopes[J].Soil Science Society of America Journal,1991,55(2):339-344.

Abrams D M, Lobkovsky A E, Petroff A P, et al. Growth laws for channel networks incised by groundwater flow[J].Nature Geoscience,2009,2:193-196.

Nouwakpo S K, Huang C, Bowling L, et al. Impact of vertical hydraulic gradient on RILL erodibility and critical shear stress[J].Soil Science Society of America Journal,2010,74(6):1914-1921.

Nouwakpo S K, Huang C H. The role of subsurface hydrology in soil erosion and channel network development on a laboratory hillslope[J].Soil Science Society of America Journal,2012,76(4):1197-1211.

Fox G A, Chu-Agor L M, Wilson G V. Erosion of noncohesive sediment by ground water seepage:Lysimeter experiments and stability modeling[J].Soil Science Society of America Journal,2007,71(6):1822-1830.

崔艳平,郑粉莉,刘雨.水文条件对紫色土坡面土壤侵蚀及养分流失的影响[J].中国水土保持科学,2009,7(1):1-7.

Su Z A, Xiong D H, Zhang J H, et al. Variation in the vertical zonality of erodibility and critical shear stress of rill erosion in China's Hengduan Mountains[J].Earth Surface Processes and Landforms,2019,44(1):88-97.

刘泽纯,李庆辰.关于元谋盆地的沉积特征与地层划分[J].海洋地质与第四纪地质,1988,8(4):65-75.

黄成敏,何毓蓉.云南省元谋干热河谷的土壤抗旱力评价[J].山地研究,1995,13(2):79-84.

张素,熊东红,郑学用,等.干热河谷不同活跃程度冲沟沟床土体抗冲性差异[J].水土保持学报,2015,29(3):13-17.

张科利,彭文英,杨红丽.中国土壤可蚀性值及其估算[J].土壤学报,2007,44(1):7-13.

Patheniades E. Erosion and deposition of cohesive soils[J].Journal of the Hydraulics Division,1965,9(1):48-53.

Elliot W J, Laflen J M. A Process-based RILL erosion model[J].Trasactions of the ASAE,1988,136(1):65-72.

肖海兵.黄土高原侵蚀与植被恢复驱动下土壤有机碳矿化与固定特征及其微生物作用机制[D].北京:中国科学院大学(中国科学院教育部水土保持与生态环境研究中心),2019.

王义霞.黄土丘陵区水力侵蚀和植被恢复对土壤有机碳输移及分布的影响[D].北京:中国科学院大学(中国科学院教育部水土保持与生态环境研究中心),2018.

刘雷,安韶山,黄华伟.应用Le Bissonnais法研究黄土丘陵区植被类型对土壤团聚体稳定性的影响[J].生态学报,2013,33(20):6670-6680.

刘宝元,张科利,焦菊英.土壤可蚀性及其在侵蚀预报中的应用[J].自然资源学报,1999,14(4):345-350.

王彬.东北典型薄层黑土区土壤可蚀性关键因子分析与土壤可蚀性计算[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2009.

柴军瑞,崔中兴.渗流对土体抗剪强度的影响[J].岩土工程技术,2001,12(1):12-13.

浏览量

1119

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

不同近地表水文条件下矿山弃土对土壤细沟可蚀性的影响—以攀枝花盐边县龙蟒矿山为例

东北黑土区林草地开垦为农田70 a后对土壤性质和土壤可蚀性的影响

冻融作用下高寒土细沟侵蚀过程与输沙能力经验模型

光伏板配置对坡面产流产沙的影响

川西高山峡谷区不同种植模式坡面微地形变化及其对细沟发育的响应