小五台山地区主要林分枯落物分布特征及水源涵养能力

侍柳彤; 史常青; 杜晨曦; 杨建英

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.05.025

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

小五台山地区主要林分枯落物分布特征及水源涵养能力

更新时间：2025-03-12

- 小五台山地区主要林分枯落物分布特征及水源涵养能力
- Distribution Characteristics and Water Conservation Capacity of Litter in Main Forests of Xiaowutai Mountain
- 水土保持学报 2022年36卷第5期页码：195-203
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 北京林业大学水土保持学院,北京,100083
  2. 淮河水利委员会淮河流域水土保持监测中心站,安徽,蚌埠,233000
- 作者简介：
  
  [ "侍柳彤(1997-),女,硕士研究生,主要从事水土保持与荒漠化防治研究。E-mail:shiliutong@163.com" ]
- 基金信息：
  
  国家水体污染控制与治理科技重大专项(2018ZX07110001)
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.05.025
  中图分类号： S727.21
- 纸质出版：2022
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
侍柳彤, 史常青, 杜晨曦, 等. 小五台山地区主要林分枯落物分布特征及水源涵养能力[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022,36(5):195-203.

SHI Liutong, SHI Changqing, DU Chenxi, et al. Distribution Characteristics and Water Conservation Capacity of Litter in Main Forests of Xiaowutai Mountain[J]. 2022, 36(5): 195-203.
侍柳彤, 史常青, 杜晨曦, 等. 小五台山地区主要林分枯落物分布特征及水源涵养能力[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022,36(5):195-203. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.05.025.

SHI Liutong, SHI Changqing, DU Chenxi, et al. Distribution Characteristics and Water Conservation Capacity of Litter in Main Forests of Xiaowutai Mountain[J]. 2022, 36(5): 195-203. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.05.025.

摘要

为评估小五台山地区主要林分的水源涵养能力

同时为筛选水源涵养树种提供新思路

通过浸泡法和模拟降雨法

对小五台山地区7种典型林分枯落物分布特征及水源涵养能力进行研究。结果表明:(1)林分枯落物覆盖面积和厚度均表现为阔叶林大于针阔叶混交林、针叶林

其最大分别为青杨纯林和蒙古栎纯林

且厚度表现出坡下大于坡上的特征;(2)枯落物蓄积量为油松纯林＞青杨纯林＞油松×蒙古栎混交林＞白桦纯林＞粉桦×云杉混交林＞蒙古栎纯林＞椴树纯林

其中半分解层大于未分解层;(3)枯落物吸持能力表现为半分解层大于未分解层

且针阔叶混交林和大部分阔叶林大于针叶林

其中青杨纯林的最大

最大持水量、有效拦蓄量和最终吸持量分别为1.69

1.37

0.41 mm;(4)所有林分枯落物持水率均表现为浸泡法大于模拟降雨法

只采用传统的浸泡法会导致研究结果偏大。各林分枯落物水源涵养能力表现为阔叶林和针阔混交林优于针叶林

其中青杨纯林和白桦纯林水源涵养能力最强

在今后水源涵养林的树种筛选中可考虑多选择青杨和白桦等阔叶树。

Abstract

In order to evaluate the water conservation capacity of main forests in Xiaowutai Mountains and provide a new idea for the selection of water conservation tree species

the distribution characteristics and water conservation capacity of litter of seven typical forests in Xiaowutai Mountains were studied by immersion method and simulated rainfall method. The results showed that: (1) The litter thickness and distribution range of broad-leaved forests were greater than those of coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forests and coniferous forests

which were the greatest in pure forest of Populus cathayana Rehd. and pure forest of Quercus mongolica Fischer ex Ledebour

respectively

and the thickness on lower slope were greater than that on upper slope. (2) Litter accumulation followed the order of pure forest of Pinus tabuliformis Carrière > pure forest of P. cathayana Rehd. > mixed forest of P. tabuliformis Carrière and Q. mongolica Fischer ex Ledebour > pure forest of B. platyphylla Suk. > mixed forest of B. platyphylla Suk. and Picea asperata Masters > pure forest of Q. mongolica Fischer ex Ledebour > pure forest of Tiliatuan Szyszylowicz

and the litter accumulation of the semi-decomposed layer was larger than that of the undecomposed layer. (3) The litter holding capacity of the semi-decomposed layer was larger than that of the undecomposed layer

and the litter holding capacity of coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forests and mostly broad-leaved forests was greater than that of coniferous forests. Among them

the maximum water holding capacity

effective storage capacity and the final holding capacity of litter of pure forest P. cathayana Rehd. of were the greatest

which was 1.69

1.37 and 0.41 mm

respectively. (4) The water holding capacity of litter in all forests was higher in immersion method than that in rainfall simulation method

so if only using the traditional soaking method

the results would be too large. The water conservation capacity of litter in broad-leaved forest

coniferous and broad-leaved mixed forest was better than that in coniferous forest

among which the water conservation capacity of pure forest of P. cathayana Rehd. and pure forest of B. platyphylla Suk. both were the strongest. More broad-leaved trees such as P. cathayana Rehd. and B. platyphylla Suk. should be selected in the selection of tree species for water conservation forest in the future.

关键词

Keywords

references

周佳雯,高吉喜,高志球,等.森林生态系统水源涵养服务功能解析[J].生态学报,2018,38(5):1679-1686.

王晓学,沈会涛,李叙勇,等.森林水源涵养功能的多尺度内涵、过程及计量方法[J].生态学报,2013,33(4):1019-1030.

赵娜,王俊博,李少宁,等.北京松山4种典型林分枯落物持水特征研究[J].生态环境学报,2021,30(6):1139-1147.

韩春,陈宁,孙杉,等.森林生态系统水文调节功能及机制研究进展[J].生态学杂志,2019,38(7):2191-2199.

孙向阳,王根绪,吴勇,等.川西亚高山典型森林生态系统截留水文效应[J].生态学报,2013,33(2):501-508.

Li X, Niu J Z, Xie B Y. Study on hydrological functions of litter layers in North China[J].PLoS One,2013,8(7):1-11.

刘小娥,苏世平.兰州市南北两山5种典型人工林凋落物的水文功能[J].应用生态学报,2020,31(8):2574-2582.

杨霞,陈丽华,康影丽,等.辽东低山区5种典型水源涵养林枯落物持水特性[J].生态学杂志,2019,38(9):2662-2670.

Cai D, Yang X H, Wang S Z, et al. Effects of dissolved organic matter derived from forest leaf litter on biodegradation of phenanthrene in aqueous phase[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials,2017,324(B):516-525.

Adolfo C C, Lourdes C H, Sandra R O. Mass, nutrient pool, and mineralization of litter and fine roots in a tropical mountain cloud forest[J].Science of the Total Environment,2017,575(1):876-886.

王忠禹,王兵,刘国彬,等.黄土丘陵区典型植被枯落物坡面分布及混入土壤对土壤性状的影响[J].自然资源学报,2018,33(11):2020-2031.

Zheng X L, Chen L H, Gong W Y, et al. Evaluation of the water conservation function of different forest types in northeastern China[J].Sustainability,2019,11(15):4075.

杨建伟,杨建英,何会宾,等.冀北山区滦平县4种新造林地水源涵养能力研究[J].生态学报,2019,39(18):6731-6737.

杨家慧,谭伟,卯光宪,等.黔中不同龄组柳杉人工林枯落物水源涵养能力综合评价[J].水土保持学报,2020,34(2):296-301,308.

丁霞,程昌锦,漆良华,等.丹江口库区湖北水源区不同密度马尾松人工林水源涵养能力[J].生态学杂志,2019,38(8):2291-2301.

牛勇,刘洪禄,张志强.北京地区典型树种及非生物因子对枯落物水文效应的影响[J].农业工程学报,2015,31(8):183-189.

尤海舟,毕君,蔡蕾,等.小五台山不同林分类型林地水文效应及涵养水源生态功能价值估算[J].中国农学通报,2013,29(13):60-65.

杜晨曦,史常青,杨建英,等.小五台山典型林分枯落物持水恢复能力研究[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(3):236-243.

韩函,吴昊旻,黄安宁.华北地区夏季降水日变化的时空分布特征[J].大气科学,2017,41(2):263-274.

许小明,邹亚东,孙景梅,等.黄土高原北洛河流域林地枯落物特征及水分吸持效应[J].生态学报,2021,41(13):5153-5165.

郝弯弯,赵鹏,李思维,等.御道口牧场不同类型防护林的枯落物水文效应[J].水土保持学报,2019,33(6):197-204.

韦小茶,周秋文,崔兴芬,等.喀斯特针叶林枯落物层水文效应[J].生态科学,2017,36(4):120-127.

Burrows C R, Appold M S. Hydrology of the forest city basin, Mid-Continent, USA:Implications for CO

sequestration in the St. Peter Sandstone[J].Environmental Earth Sciences,2015,73(4):1409-1425.

公博,师忱,何会宾,等.冀北山区6种人工林的林地水源涵养能力[J].干旱区资源与环境,2019,33(3):165-170.

栾莉莉,张光辉,孙龙,等.黄土高原区典型植被枯落物蓄积量空间变化特征[J].中国水土保持科学,2015,13(6):48-53.

邵臻,张富,陈瑾,等.陇中黄土丘陵沟壑区不同土地利用下土壤水分变化分析[J].干旱区资源与环境,2017,31(12):129-135.

汪建芳,王兵,王忠禹,等.黄土高原典型植被枯落物坡面分布及持水特征[J].水土保持学报,2018,32(4):139-144.

张缓,穆兴民,高鹏.黄土高原不同立地条件下枯落物蓄积量及持水特征[J].水土保持研究,2021,28(3):45-52.

浏览量

611

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

黄土丘陵沟壑区典型植物群落切沟系统植被生长特性

三峡库区土壤有机质区域分布及影响因素

子午岭地区植被演替的土壤碳汇效应

多因素干扰下森林公园枯落物水文效应