金沙江干热河谷活跃和稳定冲沟集水区土壤优先流特征

李志成; 赵洋毅; 王克勤; 段旭; 徐贵迁

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.06.016

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

金沙江干热河谷活跃和稳定冲沟集水区土壤优先流特征

更新时间：2025-03-12

- 金沙江干热河谷活跃和稳定冲沟集水区土壤优先流特征
- Soil Preferential Flow Characteristics in Active and Stable Gully Catchment Areas of the Dry-hot Valleys of the Jinsha River
- 水土保持学报 2022年36卷第6期页码：119-127
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 西南林业大学生态与环境学院,昆明,650224
  2. 国家林业和草原局云南玉溪森林生态系统国家定位观测研究站,昆明,650224
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目(42067005,31860235);云南省农业联合专项面上项目(202101BD070001-075);云南省万人计划青年拔尖人才专项(YNWR-QNBJ-2019-215,YNWR-QNBJ-2019-226);国家林草局林业科技创新平台运行项目"云南玉溪森林生态系统国家长期科研基地项目"(2020132550);云南省自然生态监测网络项目(2021-YN-13)
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.06.016
  中图分类号： S152.7
- 纸质出版：2022
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
李志成, 赵洋毅, 王克勤, 等. 金沙江干热河谷活跃和稳定冲沟集水区土壤优先流特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022,36(6):119-127.

LI Zhicheng, ZHAO Yangyi, WANG Keqin, et al. Soil Preferential Flow Characteristics in Active and Stable Gully Catchment Areas of the Dry-hot Valleys of the Jinsha River[J]. 2022, 36(6): 119-127.
李志成, 赵洋毅, 王克勤, 等. 金沙江干热河谷活跃和稳定冲沟集水区土壤优先流特征[J]. 水土保持学报, 2022,36(6):119-127. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.06.016.

LI Zhicheng, ZHAO Yangyi, WANG Keqin, et al. Soil Preferential Flow Characteristics in Active and Stable Gully Catchment Areas of the Dry-hot Valleys of the Jinsha River[J]. 2022, 36(6): 119-127. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2022.06.016.

摘要

为揭示金沙江干热河谷冲沟集水区土壤优先流特征

以金沙江元谋干热河谷地区不同发育程度冲沟(活跃期、稳定期)集水区为研究对象

采用野外染色示踪和统计分析相结合的方法

通过图像处理技术

从野外染色图像中整合出相关5个优先流特征指标

并结合根系特征

对比分析土壤优先流差异规律。结果表明:(1)稳定期冲沟集水区在0—15 cm土层深度范围出现大面积的团块状染色

随后呈小枝状分布

染色区分布相对更加集中

活跃期染色呈整体状—团块状—枝状分布

表明活跃期冲沟集水区染色形态特征更加分化。(2)活跃期冲沟集水区的平均基质流深度、平均染色面积比、平均土壤染色斑块形状系数和优先流平均长度指数(20.53 cm

54.25%

24.94

592.46%)分别是稳定期冲沟集水区的1.79

1.62

2.20

1.16倍

表现为活跃期冲沟系统集水区优先流发生时间相对滞后

优先流发育程度更大

优先流空间异质性相对较强。(3)随土层深度增加

根重密度和根长密度均呈减小趋势

且二者与染色面积比均呈显著正相关关系(p＜0.05)。活跃期冲沟集水区各土层根重密度和根长密度均大于稳定期冲沟集水区。研究结果为揭示金沙江干热河谷冲沟集水区土壤优先流特征提供理论依据

同时为该地区生态恢复与水土保持工作提供参考和借鉴。

Abstract

In order to reveal the characteristics of soil preferential flow in the catchment areas of gully systems in Yuanmou Dry-hot Valley

the catchment areas of gully systems with different development degrees (active and stable phases) were selected as the research objects in Yuanmou Dry-hot Valley of the Jinsha River

using a combination of field staining tracing and statistical analysis

five preferential flow indicators were integrated from the field staining images by image processing techniques

and combined with the root characteristics

the differences of soil preferential flow were analyzed. The results showed that: (1) In the gully catchment areas at stable stage

massive clump-like staining appeared in the depth range of 0—15 cm soil layer

and then it was distributed twig-like

and the distribution of staining areas were relatively more concentrated. In the active phases

the staining showed a monolithic-clumpy-branched distribution

indicating that the staining morphological characteristics in the active phases were more differentiated. (2) The mean matrix flow depth

the average staining area ratio

the average shape coefficient of staining patch and the mean length index of preferential flow (20.53 cm

54.25%

24.94 and 592.46%) in the active phases gully catchment areas was 1.79

1.62

2.20 and 1.16 times that in the stable phases

respectively. It showed that the occurrence time of preferential flow in the catchment areas of active gully was relatively late

the development degree of preferential flow was greater and the spatial heterogeneity of priority flow was relatively strong. (3) Both root weight density and root length density decreased with the increasing of soil depth

and both of them showed a significant positive correlation with staining area ratio (p＜0.05). The root weight density and root length density of each soil layer in the active gully catchment areas were greater than those in the stable phases. The results of the study provided theoretical basis for revealing the soil preferential flow characteristics of catchment areas of Yuanmou Dry-hot Valley of the Jinsha River

and also provided references and lessons for ecological restoration and soil and water conservation in this area.

关键词

Keywords

references

文孝丽,董一帆,杨己,等.元谋干热河谷冲沟发育区植被恢复对土壤碳氮的影响[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(4):282-288.

杨淏舟,何光熊,王艳丹,等.干热河谷燥红土坡面水分时空分布特征及其对覆被类型的响应[J].中国水土保持科学,2021,19(5):90-98.

徐宗恒,徐则民,曹军尉,等.土壤优先流研究现状与发展趋势[J].土壤,2012,44(6):905-916.

邵一敏,赵洋毅,段旭,等.基于分形分析的干热河谷区典型地类土壤优先路径分布特征[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2020,48(7):102-112.

张欣,张洪江,张福明,等.西南山区农地土壤前期含水量对优先流的影响[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(2):1-7.

解璐萌,张英虎,张明祥,等.黄河三角洲刺槐群落土壤优先流及养分分布特征[J].生态学报,2021,41(19):7713-7724.

张建中,姚晶晶,张成梁,等.排矸场植被恢复初期不同植被类型土壤优先流特征[J].干旱区资源与环境,2021,35(4):165-172.

Miao Y, Martine P, Esperanza H L, et al. Leaching of microplastics by preferential flow in earthworm (

Lumbricus terrestris

) burrows[J].Environmental Chemistry,2019,16(1):31-40.

Kan X Q, Cheng J H, Hou F. Response of preferential soil flow to different infiltration rates and vegetation types in the Karst region of southwest China[J].Water,2020,12(6):57-78.

邵一敏,赵洋毅,段旭,等.金沙江干热河谷典型林草地植物根系对土壤优先流的影响[J].应用生态学报,2020,31(3):725-734.

董均贵,吕海波,陈国强.基于核磁共振技术的孔隙水形态及土壤渗透性分析[J].农业工程学报,2020,36(6):74-80.

侯芳,程金花,王通簙.基于探地雷达的滨河带藤本和次生乔木林土壤优先流特征[J].生态学报,2022,42(5):1766-1776.

Flammer I, Blum A, Leiser A, et al. Acoustic assessment of flow patterns in unsaturated soil[J].Journal of Applied Geophysics,2001,46(2):115-128.

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):8-13,27.

Samani A N, Ahmadi H, Jafari M, et al. Geomorphic threshold conditions for gully erosion in southwestern Iran (Boushehr-Samal watershed)[J].Journal of Asian Earth Sciences,2009,35(2):180-189.

Tsegaye Y, Mulatie M, Assefa D. Gully erosion and its impacts on soil loss and crop yield in three decades, northwest Ethiopia[J].Modeling Earth Systems and Environment,2020,7(4):1-10.

李佳佳,熊东红,卢晓宁,等.基于RTK-GPS技术的干热河谷冲沟沟头形态特征[J].山地学报,2014,32(6):706-716.

张海林,杨秀锋,易军,等.亚热带红壤区不同土地利用方式下的土壤剖面水流特征[J].水土保持学报,2019,33(6):233-241.

阮晓晗,白一茹,王幼奇,等.基于多指标分析和分形维数的不同种植年限压砂地基质流与优先流特征研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2022,40(1):86-94.

Lv G, Li J, Li Y X, et al. Preferential flow characteristics of reclaimed mine soils in a surface coal mine dump[J].Environmental Monitoring and Assessment,2017,189:e266.

Lipiec J, Medvedev V V, Birkas M, et al. Effect of soil compaction on root growth and crop yield in Central and Eastern Europe[J].International Agrophysics,2003,17(2):61-69.

刘剑荣,杨磊,卫伟,等.半干旱黄土区柠条灌丛不同植被管理方式下的土壤水分[J].草业科学,2021,38(8):1439-1450.

Li M F, Yao J J, Cheng J H. Study on the preferential flow characteristics under different precipitation amounts in simian mountain grassland of China[J].Water,2020,12(12):e3489.

Shein E V. Soil hydrology: Stages of development current state and nearest prospects[J].Eurasian Soil Science,2010,43(2):158-167.

卢华兴,段旭,赵洋毅,等.滇中磨盘山典型林分土壤优先流特征及其归因分析[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2022, 50(7):48-62.

熊东红,翟娟,杨丹,等.元谋干热河谷冲沟集水区土壤入渗性能及其影响因素[J].水土保持学报,2011,25(6):170-175.

贾昂元,张勇勇,赵文智,等.干旱区绿洲农田土壤大孔隙与水分入渗特征[J].土壤学报,2022,59(2):486-497.

Luo Z T, Niu J Z, Xie B Y, et al. Influence of root distribution on preferential flow in deciduous and coniferous forest soils[J].Forests,2019,10(11):986-1000.

朱梦雪,赵洋毅,段旭,等.红河干热河谷林草地红壤中优先流的形态分布特征[J].水土保持通报,2021,41(4):9-16.

吴晗,陈晓冰,姜波,等.秸秆还田对甘蔗地土壤优先流运动特征的影响[J].应用生态学报,2022,33(1):141-148.

李振东,朱彦光,陈晓冰,等.桂北岩溶区典型农地土壤优先流特征[J].水土保持研究,2019,26(5):68-74,80.

Bettinger P, Bradshaw G A, Weaver G W. Effects of geographic information system vector-raster-vector data conversion on landscape indices[J].Canadian Journal of Forest Research,1996,26(8):1416-1425.

王佩佩,苏雪萌,周正朝,等.黄土丘陵区典型植被群落坡面土壤优先流特征及其影响因素[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(5):16-23.

Kan X Q, Cheng J H, Hu X J, et al. Effects of grass and forests and the infiltration amount on preferential flow in karst regions of China[J].Water,2019,11(8):1634-1647.

王赵男,辛颖,赵雨森.长白山系榛子灌木林根系对优先流的影响[J].林业科学研究,2017,30(6):887-894.

张素,熊东红,校亮,等.冲沟不同部位土壤机械组成及抗冲性差异[J].土壤,2016,48(6):1270-1276.

浏览量

712

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

暂无数据