工程扰动对黄土抗蚀性与抗冲性的影响

王龙; 张连科; 马伊明; 杜峰; 徐学选

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.04.003

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

工程扰动对黄土抗蚀性与抗冲性的影响

更新时间：2025-03-12

- 工程扰动对黄土抗蚀性与抗冲性的影响
- Influence of Engineering Disturbance on Soil Anti-Erodibility and Anti-Scourability of Loess
- 水土保持学报 2021年35卷第4期页码：14-20
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 中国科学院水利部水土保持研究所, 陕西杨凌,712100
  2. 中国科学院大学,北京,100049
  3. 甘肃省科学院地质自然灾害防治研究所,兰州,730000
  4. 西北农林科技大学水土保持研究所, 陕西杨凌,712100
- 作者简介：
  
  [ "王龙(1995-),男,硕士研究生,主要从事土壤水分运移与生态修复研究。E-mail:wanglong18@mails.ucas.ac.cn" ]
- 基金信息：
  
  甘肃省科学院应用研究与开发项目（2019-JK-07）国家自然科学基金项目（41977426，41771322）
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.04.003
  中图分类号： S157.1
- 纸质出版：2021
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
王龙, 张连科, 马伊明, 等. 工程扰动对黄土抗蚀性与抗冲性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2021,35(4):14-20.

WANG Long, ZHANG Lianke, MA Yiming, et al. Influence of Engineering Disturbance on Soil Anti-Erodibility and Anti-Scourability of Loess[J]. 2021, 35(4): 14-20.
王龙, 张连科, 马伊明, 等. 工程扰动对黄土抗蚀性与抗冲性的影响[J]. 水土保持学报, 2021,35(4):14-20. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.04.003.

WANG Long, ZHANG Lianke, MA Yiming, et al. Influence of Engineering Disturbance on Soil Anti-Erodibility and Anti-Scourability of Loess[J]. 2021, 35(4): 14-20. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.04.003.

摘要

为研究工程扰动对黄土抗蚀性和抗冲性的影响，以兰州市城关区北山为研究区，选取1年填方样地（T1a）、5年填方样地（T5a）、7年挖方样地（W7a）和天然草地（C）4个样地采集原状土样，在室内使用干筛—湿筛法测定土壤团聚体相关指标研究土壤抗蚀性，用抗冲槽研究土壤抗冲性，并分析了影响土壤抗蚀性和抗冲性的因素。结果表明，各样地表层（0—10 cm）土壤水稳性团聚体的平均质量直径（MWDw）和>0.25 mm团聚体占比（w（δ>0.25）w）表现为C>W7a>T5a>T1a，土壤团聚体破坏率（PAD）表现为T1a>T5a>W7a>C，挖填方样地表层土壤水稳性团聚体颗粒分形维数（Dw）均值为2.82，C样地Dw为2.74，C样地表层土壤的抗蚀性显著强于挖填方样地；T5a和W7a样地中下层土壤（10—20，20—30 cm）MWDw和w（δ>0.25）w显著低于表层土壤；各样地表层土壤抗冲系数为W7a>C>T5a>T1a，W7a和C样地的值较为接近。影响土壤抗蚀性与抗冲性的主要因素有土壤电导率、有机质和根系，土壤生物结皮也会影响土壤抗冲性。这些影响因素与挖填方样地搁置年限密切相关，即随着挖填方样地搁置年限增长，这些因素逐渐发生变化，有益于受扰动土壤MWDw和w（δ>0.25）w的增加以及PAD的降低，其表层土壤的冲刷强度慢慢接近草地。工程扰动显著降低黄土的抗蚀性和抗冲性，应当做好必要的水土保持措施以降低土壤侵蚀风险。

Abstract

In order to study the influence of engineering disturbance on the soil anti-erodibility and anti-scourability of loess

taking Beishan

Chengguan District

Lanzhou City as the study area

the undisturbed soils were sampled from four plots: 1-year filled plot (T1a)

5-year filled plot (T5a)

7-year dug plot (W7a) and natural grassland plot (C). In the laboratory

the dry-wet sieve method was used to determine the soil aggregate related indicators to study the soil anti-erodibility

and the anti-scour trough was used to study the soil anti-scourability

and the factors affecting the soil anti-erodibility and anti-scourability were analyzed. The results showed that the mean weight diameter of soil water-stable aggregates (MWDw) and the proportion of aggregates>0.25 mm (w(δ>0.25)w) of the surface layer (0—10 cm) of each sample surface showed C>W7a>T5a>T1a. The soil percentage of aggregates destruction (PAD) showed T1a>T5a>W7a>C. The average of soil water stable aggregates fractal dimension (Dw) in the surface layer of dug and filled plots was 2.82

the Dw of C plot was 2.74. The anti-erodibility of the surface layer soil of the C was significantly stronger than those of the dug and filled sites. The MWDw and w(δ>0.25)w of the middle and lower soil (10—20 cm and 20—30 cm) of the T5a and W7a plots were significantly lower than those of the surface layer soil. The surface soil anti-erosion coefficients of each sample showed W7a>C>T5a>T1a

and the values of W7a and C sample plots were relatively close. Soil electrical conductivity

organic matter and root system were the main factors affecting soil anti-erodibility and soil anti-scourability. In addition

soil biological crusts could also affect soil anti-scourability. These factors are closely related to the shelving years of dug and filled plots. This means

these factors gradually change as the shelving time of dug and filled plots increases

which is beneficial to the increase of MWDw and w(δ>0.25)w

and the decrease of PAD of disturbed soil

and the scouring intensity of surface soil is close to that of natural grassland. Engineering disturbance would significantly reduce the soil anti-erodibility and soil anti-scourability of loess

and necessary water and soil conservation measures should be taken to reduce the risk of soil erosion.

关键词

Keywords

references

孟西安.奇迹托起延安梦:延安"削山填沟、上山建城"纪实[N].人民日报(海外版),2014-06-09(05).

杜光利.延安削山造城[J].大经贸,2012,290(11):52-55.

贺春雄.延安治沟造地工程的现状、特点及作用[J].地球环境学报,2015,6(4):255-260.

张明泉,纪淑娜,孙年祥.兰州削山填沟整地工程主要环境影响及防治对策[J].干旱区资源与环境,2009,23(3):77-82.

杨小威.西北某湿陷性黄土地区房地产开发相关风险研究和对策分析[D].广州:华南理工大学,2015.

白秀梅,韩有志,郭汉清.关帝山不同植被恢复类型土壤抗蚀性研究[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(2):79-84.

马西军,程金花,张洪江,等.山西中阳5种人工林地土壤的抗蚀性研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2012,40(7):113-119.

郭培才,张振中,杨开宝.黄土区土壤抗蚀性预报及评价方法研究[J].水土保持学报,1992,6(3):48-51,58.

王佩将,戴全厚,丁贵杰,等.退化喀斯特植被恢复过程中的土壤抗蚀性变化[J].土壤学报,2014,51(4):806-815.

蒲玉琳,谢德体,林超文,等.植物篱-农作模式坡耕地土壤综合抗蚀性特征[J].农业工程学报,2013,29(18):125-135.

薛萐,刘国彬,张超,等.黄土丘陵区人工灌木林土壤抗蚀性演变特征[J].中国农业科学,2010,43(15):3143-3150.

朱冰冰,李占斌,李鹏,等.黄丘区植被恢复过程中土壤团粒分形特征及抗蚀性演变[J].西安理工大学学报,2009,25(4):377-382.

李智广.水土流失测验与调查[M].北京:中国水利水电出版社,2005.

汪有科,吴钦孝,赵鸿雁,等.林地枯落物抗冲机理研究[J].水土保持学报,1993,7(1):75-80.

李强,刘国彬,许明祥,等.黄土丘陵区撂荒地土壤抗冲性及相关理化性质[J].农业工程学报,2013,29(10):153-159.

冉茂勇,赵允格,陈彦芹.黄土丘陵水蚀区生物结皮土壤抗冲性试验研究[J].西北林学院学报,2009,24(3):37-40,62.

李超.黄土丘陵沟壑区坡面覆被格局的土壤侵蚀效应研究[D].西安:陕西师范大学,2018.

卜楠,朱清科,王蕊,等.陕北黄土区生物土壤结皮抗冲性研究[J].北京林业大学学报,2009,31(5):96-101.

陈文媛,徐学选,华瑞,等.黄土丘陵区林草退耕年限对土壤团聚体特征的影响[J].环境科学学报,2017,37(4):1486-1492.

吴彦,刘世全,付秀琴,等.植物根系提高土壤水稳性团粒含量的研究[J].土壤侵蚀与水土保持学报,1997,3(1):45-49.

李相,丁建丽,侯艳军,等.干旱半干旱区土壤含盐量和电导率高光谱估算[J].冰川冻土,2015,37(4):1050-1058.

何建军,姚立蓉,汪军成,等.干旱和盐胁迫对盐生植物盐生草种子萌发特性的影响[J].草业学报,2020,29(11):129-140.

Wang Y, Chen J, Gu W, et al. Earthworm activities increase the leaching of salt and water from salt-affected agricultural soil during the wet-dry process under simulated rainfall conditions[J].Biology and Fertility of Soils,2016,52(3):323-330.

郭明明,王文龙,史倩华,等.黄土高塬沟壑区退耕地土壤抗冲性及其与影响因素的关系[J].农业工程学报,2016,32(10):129-136.

吕刚,刘红民,高英旭,等.排土场边坡根系分布及其对土壤抗冲性的影响[J].土壤通报,2014,45(3):711-715.

Knapen A, Poesen J, Galindo-Morales P, et al. Effects of microbiotic crusts under cropland in temperate environments on soil erodibility during concentrated flow[J].Earth Surface Processes and Landforms,2007,32(12):1884-1901.

Seitz S, Nebel M, Goebes P, et al. Bryophyte-dominated biological soil crusts mitigate soil erosion in an early successional Chinese subtropical forest[J].Biogeosciences,2017,14(24):5775-5788.

浏览量

823

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

黄土区草地根系生物力学特性研究

不同巨桉林下紫色土壤抗蚀性与土壤因子的耦合关系分析

紫色丘陵区不同土地利用方式土壤剖面微团聚体组成及分形特征