不同雨强条件下工程措施对坡地产流产沙影响

曹媛; 孙鹏; 姚蕊; 汪军红; 冯安兰; 胡玉乾

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.06.001

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

不同雨强条件下工程措施对坡地产流产沙影响

更新时间：2025-03-12

- 不同雨强条件下工程措施对坡地产流产沙影响
- Effects of Engineering Measures on the Runoff and Sediment Yield in Slope Land Under Different Rainfall Intensities
- 水土保持学报 2020年34卷第6期页码：1-7
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 安徽师范大学地理与旅游学院,安徽,芜湖,241002
  2. 南京师范大学虚拟地理环境教育部重点实验室,南京,210023
  3. 霍山县水土保持试验站, 安徽霍山,237266
- 作者简介：
  
  [ "曹媛(1997-),女,安徽马鞍山人,硕士研究生,主要从事水土流失研究。E-mail:2543754010@qq.com" ]
- 基金信息：
  
  国家重点研发计划项目"不同温升情景下区域气象灾害风险评估"（2019YFA0606900）国家自然科学基金项目（41601023，41771536）安徽省自然科学基金项目（1808085QD117）
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.06.001
  中图分类号： S157.1
- 纸质出版：2020
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
曹媛, 孙鹏, 姚蕊, 等. 不同雨强条件下工程措施对坡地产流产沙影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020,34(6):1-7.

CAO Yuan, SUN Peng, YAO Rui, et al. Effects of Engineering Measures on the Runoff and Sediment Yield in Slope Land Under Different Rainfall Intensities[J]. 2020, 34(6): 1-7.
曹媛, 孙鹏, 姚蕊, 等. 不同雨强条件下工程措施对坡地产流产沙影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2020,34(6):1-7. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.06.001.

CAO Yuan, SUN Peng, YAO Rui, et al. Effects of Engineering Measures on the Runoff and Sediment Yield in Slope Land Under Different Rainfall Intensities[J]. 2020, 34(6): 1-7. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2020.06.001.

摘要

基于试验站不同坡地措施（坡耕地和坡改梯）2016年和2017年的逐日降水、产流产沙数据，研究不同坡地措施和雨强下产流产沙规律特征，定量揭示坡改梯和坡耕地对产流产沙的影响。结果表明：（1）7月平均雨强I、最大雨强I30及坡地产流量最大，8月最大雨强I60与坡地产沙量最大，表明坡地产流产沙高峰期与雨强高峰期一致。（2）春夏两季产流、产沙量与I、I30和I60相关性显著（超过95%置信度检验）。其中坡耕地产流产沙量与I、I30、I60的相关系数整体高于坡改梯。春夏季坡耕地产沙量分别是坡改梯的3.91，7.85倍。（3）降雨主要集中在I（1~3 mm/h）、I30（3~29 mm/h）、I60（2~27 mm/h）之间，且坡地产流产沙量与最大雨强I30、最大雨强I60在95%置信度水平呈现显著正相关。当I30达到29.0 mm/h、I60达到26.6 mm/h时，坡地产流产沙达到最大，坡耕地产流产沙峰值是坡改梯的2.43，7.52倍以上，并且坡耕地全年产流产沙变异系数总体高于坡改梯，因此坡改梯工程在一定程度上防治了水土流失，使产流产沙变化减小。

Abstract

Based on the daily precipitation and runoff sediment yield data in 2016 and 2017 under different slope land measures (slope farmland and changing slope to terrace) in the test station

the law characteristics of runoff sediment yield under different slope land measures and rainfall intensities were studied. The impact of changing slope to terrace and slope farmland on runoff and sediment was quantitatively revealed. The results showed that: (1) In July

the average rainfall intensity I

the maximum rainfall intensity I30 and the slope land runoff were the largest

and in August

the maximum rainfall intensity I60 and the slope land sediment yield were the largest

indicating that the peak of runoff and sediment was the same as the peak of rainfall intensities. (2) The correlations between runoff and sediment yield in spring and summer and I

I30 and I60 were significant (more than 95% confidence test). The correlation coefficients in slope land were higher than those in changing slope to terrace land. In spring and summer

the sediment yields in slope land were 3.91 and 7.85 times of those in changing slope to terrace land. (3) The rainfall was mainly concentrated in I: 1~3 mm/h

I30: 3~29 mm/h

I60: 2~27 mm/h

and the runoff and sediment yield in slope land was positively correlated with the maximum rainfall intensity I30 and I60 at 95% confidence level. When I30 reached 29.0 mm/h

I60 reached 26.6 mm/h

the runoff and sediment yield in slope land reached the maximum. The peak values of runoff and sediment yield in slope land were 2.43

7.52 times higher than those in changing slope to terrace land. The variation coefficients of runoff and sediment yield in the whole year were higher than those in changing slope to terrace land. Thus

changing slope land to terrace could prevent soil erosion to a certain extent

and reduce the variation of runoff and sediment yield.

关键词

Keywords

references

李志刚,梁心蓝,黄洪粮,等.坡耕地地表起伏对坡面漫流的影响[J].水土保持学报,2020,34(2):71-77,85.

张松松,胡续礼,张光灿,等.不同耕作方式对小流域坡改梯工程效果的影响[J].中国水土保持科学,2015,13(6):91-97.

Meester T. Soil erosion and conservation[J].Earth Science Reviews,1987,24(1):68-69.

Oosten V, Ary M. The political economy of soil erosion in developing countries[J].Land Use Policy,1985,2(4):355-356.

Liu D D, She D L, Yu S E, et al. Rainfall intensity and slope gradient effects on sediment losses and splash from a saline-sodic soil under coastal reclamation[J].Catena,2015,128:54-62.

Jia C F, Sun B P, Yu X X, et al. Analysis of runoff and sediment losses from a sloped roadbed under variable rainfall Intensities and vegetation conditions[J].Sustainability,2020,12(5). DOI:10.3390/su12052077.

Tarolli P. Agricultural terraces special issue preface[J].Land Degradation and Development,2018,29(10):3544-3548.

刘盼,任春颖,王岩松,等.基于RUSLE模型的梅河口市土壤侵蚀动态分析[J].水土保持通报,2019,39(1):178-185,331.

李依珊,尹斌,谢云,等.岩溶区土壤侵蚀强度评价方法[J].中国水土保持科学,2018,16(2):20-26.

周夏飞,马国霞,曹国志,等.基于USLE模型的2001-2015年江西省土壤侵蚀变化研究[J].水土保持通报,2018,38(1):8-11.

龚云龙.南方红壤丘陵区坡改梯后土壤水分概况分析[J].亚热带水土保持,2018,30(4):17-21,53.

程圣东,杭朋磊,李鹏,等.陕南土石山区坡改梯对坡面稳定性的影响[J].水土保持研究,2018,25(5):157-161.

中共中央国务院.中国农村扶贫开发纲要(2011-2020年)[M].北京:人民出版社,2011.

邵永昌.安徽大别山区典型流域降雨径流产沙规律研究[D].南京:南京林业大学,2016.

安徽省水利厅.安徽省水土保持监测公报[Z].合肥,2005.

史志刚.皖西大别山区水土流失特征及其综合防治研究[J].水土保持研究,2012,19(5):43-46.

Baets S, Poesen J, Knapen A, et al. Root characteristics of representative Mediterranean plant species and their erosion-reducing potential during concentrated runoff[J].Plant and Soil,2007,294:169-183.

Bissonnais Y, Renaux B, Delouche H. Interactions between soil properties and moisture content in crust formation, runoff and interrill erosion from tilled loess soils[J].Catena,1995,25(1):33-46.

马波,由政,吴发启,等.种植大豆条件下土壤结皮对坡耕地径流和侵蚀产沙的影响[J].中国水土保持科学,2015,13(3):16-23.

朱继前,韩美,徐泽华,等.淮河流域不同量级降雨时空分布特征及其影响因素[J].水土保持研究,2019,26(4):87-95.

黄刚.重庆市喀斯特山地农耕区水土流失特征及其影响因素分析[D].重庆:西南大学,2009.

浏览量

1412

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

次降雨对马尾松低效林改造初期坡面产流产沙的影响

雨强和坡度对嵌套砾石红壤坡面产流产沙的影响

不同耕种模式下遂宁组紫色土坡耕地产流产沙特征

翻耕除草对不同坡长下紫色土氮磷流失的影响

模拟玉米茎秆流对土壤侵蚀的影响