黄土高原土壤可蚀性对退耕还林(草)的响应

黄琬雲; 赵允格; 刘宝元; 王闪闪; 杨凯; 孙会; 谷康民

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.013

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

黄土高原土壤可蚀性对退耕还林(草)的响应

更新时间：2025-03-12

- 黄土高原土壤可蚀性对退耕还林(草)的响应
- Response of Soil Erodibility on the Loess Plateau to the Grain to Green Program
- 水土保持学报 2023年37卷第4期页码：94-100
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 西北农林科技大学水土保持研究所, 陕西杨凌,712100
  2. 中国科学院水利部水土保持研究所, 陕西杨凌,712100
  3. 西北农林科技大学资源环境学院, 陕西杨凌,712100
  4. 西北农林科技大学林学院, 陕西杨凌,712100
- 作者简介：
  
  [ "黄琬雲(1995-),女,在读博士研究生,主要从事土壤侵蚀与水土保持研究。E-mail:wanyunhuang@nwafu.edu.cn" ]
- 基金信息：
  
  国家自然科学基金项目(41830758)
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.013
  中图分类号： S157.1
- 纸质出版：2023
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
黄琬雲, 赵允格, 刘宝元, 等. 黄土高原土壤可蚀性对退耕还林(草)的响应[J]. 水土保持学报, 2023,37(4):94-100.

HUANG Wanyun, ZHAO Yunge, LIU Baoyuan, et al. Response of Soil Erodibility on the Loess Plateau to the Grain to Green Program[J]. 2023, 37(4): 94-100.
黄琬雲, 赵允格, 刘宝元, 等. 黄土高原土壤可蚀性对退耕还林(草)的响应[J]. 水土保持学报, 2023,37(4):94-100. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.013.

HUANG Wanyun, ZHAO Yunge, LIU Baoyuan, et al. Response of Soil Erodibility on the Loess Plateau to the Grain to Green Program[J]. 2023, 37(4): 94-100. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.013.

摘要

退耕还林(草)的实施显著影响黄土高原退耕地土壤理化属性

进而可能影响土壤可蚀性。然而

目前黄土高原全区土壤可蚀性对退耕方式的响应及其区域特征尚不明确。为此

以耕地为对照

以黄土高原4个降雨量带内(200~300

300~400

400~500

>500 mm)的3种退耕地(乔木林地、灌木地和草地)为对象

通过野外调查和室内分析

研究不同类型退耕地土壤理化性质

采用EPIC模型估算土壤可蚀性

分析不同退耕方式对黄土高原不同区域土壤可蚀性的影响。结果表明:就整个黄土高原而言

退耕地0—20 cm土壤有机碳含量增加1.22~2.83 g/kg

乔木林地、灌木地和草地的土壤有机碳含量分别平均增加1.70

1.72

2.72 g/kg。黄土高原仅200~300 mm降雨量带内的草地与耕地的黏粒差异显著

300~400

400~500

>500 mm降雨量带内的各类型退耕地间的黏粒、粉砂粒和砂粒差异不显著。相较于耕地

退耕地土壤可蚀性呈现降低趋势

由0.012 4 (t·hm2·h)/(hm2·MJ·mm)降至0.011 5 (t·hm2·h)/(hm2·MJ·mm)

但差异不显著

乔木林地、灌木地、草地与耕地间土壤可蚀性亦无显著差异。总体表明

退耕还林(草)虽显著提高土壤有机碳含量

但并未显著影响颗粒组成和土壤可蚀性。研究结果可为预报黄土高原退耕后的土壤侵蚀提供科学依据。

Abstract

The implementation of Grain to Green Program (GTGP) significantly affects the physicochemical properties of the soil on the Loess Plateau

which may influence the soil erodibility. However

the response of soil erodibility to GTGP and its regional characteristics across the Loess Plateau were still unclear. Accordingly

with cultivated land as the control

the soil physicochemical properties of three types of reclaimed farmland (forest

shrub land and grassland) in four rainfall zones (200~300

300~400

400~500

>500 mm) on the Loess Plateau were studied through field investigation and laboratory analysis. The EPIC model was used to estimate soil erodibility and analyze the effects of different conversion types on soil erodibility in different areas of the Loess Plateau. The results showed that in the whole Loess Plateau

the soil organic carbon content of 0—20 cm of GTGP increased by 1.22~2.83 g/kg

and the soil organic carbon content of forest

shrub

and grassland increased by 1.70

1.72 and 2.72 g/kg

respectively. In the Loess Plateau

there were significant differences in the clay particles between grassland and farmland within the rainfall zone of 200~300 mm

but there were no significant differences in the clay particles

silt particles and sand particles among different types of converted farmland in the rainfall zone of 300~400

400~500 and >500 mm. Soil erodibility before and after GTGP on the Loess Plateau showed a decreasing trend from 0.012 4 to 0.011 5 (t·hm2·h)/(hm2·MJ·mm)

respectively

but the difference was not significant

and there was no significant difference in soil erodibility among forest

shrub

grassland and cultivated land. Overall

the GTGP greatly enhanced the soil organic carbon content

but had no effect on soil particle composition and soil erodibility. The results can provide a scientific basis for predicting soil erosion on the Loess Plateau after GTGP.

关键词

Keywords

references

朱显谟,孙林夫,杨文治,等.黄土高原综合治理分区[J].中国科学院西北水土保持研究所集刊(黄土高原综合治理专集),1985(1):2-66.

Russell S H, William W D. Landscape erosion and evolution modeling[M].New York: Kluwer Acdaemic Publishers,2011.

Williams J R, Sharpley A N. EPIC-Erosion/productivity impact calculator:1.Model documentation.2.User manua[R].USDA Agriculture Research Service,1990,4(4):206-207.

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

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.

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.

张科利,蔡永明,刘宝元,等.黄土高原地区土壤可蚀性及其应用研究[J].生态学报,2001,21(10):1687-1695.

Zhang B J, Zhang G H, Yang H Y, et al. Soil resistance to flowing water erosion of seven typical plant communities on steep gully slopes on the Loess Plateau of China[J].Catena,2019,173:375-383.

孙龙,张光辉,王兵,等.黄土高原不同退耕年限刺槐林地土壤侵蚀阻力[J].农业工程学报,2017,33(10):191-197.

常海涛,赵娟,刘佳楠,等.退耕还林与还草对土壤理化性质及分形特征的影响:以宁夏荒漠草原为例[J].草业学报,2019,28(7):14-25.

彭文英,张科利,陈瑶, 等.黄土坡耕地退耕还林后土壤性质变化研究[J].自然资源学报,2005,20(2):272-278.

许明祥.黄土丘陵区生态恢复过程中土壤质量演变及调控[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2003.

Guo M M, Wang W L, Liang K H, et al. Changes in soil properties and erodibility of gully heads induced by vegetation restoration on the Loess Plateau,China[J].Journal of Arid Land,2018,10(5):712-725.

陈卓鑫,王文龙,郭明明,等.黄土高原沟壑区植被恢复对不同地貌部位土壤可蚀性的影响[J].自然资源学报,2020,35(2):387-398.

Lange O L, Meyer A, Zellner H, et al. Photosynthesis and water relations of lichen soil crusts:Field measurements in the coastal fog zone of the Namib Desert[J].Functional Ecology,1994,8(2):253-264.

West N E. Structure and function of microphytic soil crusts in wildland ecosystems of arid to semi-arid regions[J].Advances in Ecological Research,1990,20(8):179-223.

Eldridge D J, Greene R S B. Microbiotic soil crusts-a review of their roles in soil and ecological processes in the range lands of Australia[J].Australian Journal of Soil Research,1994,32(3):389-415.

Liu B Y, Xie Y, Li Z G, et al. The assessment of soil loss by water erosion in China[J].International Soil and Water Conservation Research,2020,8(4):430-439.

董旭.青海省湟水河流域不同退耕还林模式土壤效应[J].水土保持通报,2011,31(5):44-48.

Wang X T, Sun L, Zhao N N, et al. Multifractal dimensions of soil particle size distribution reveal the erodibility and fertility of alpine grassland soils in the Northern Tibet Plateau[J].Journal of Environmental Management,2022,315:115-145.

刘哲,邱炳文,王壮壮,等.2001-2014年间黄土高原植被覆盖状态时空演变分析[J].国土资源遥感,2017,29(1):192-198.

张健,刘国彬.黄土丘陵区不同植被恢复模式对沟谷地植物群落生物量和物种多样性的影响[J].自然资源学报,2010,25(2):207-217.

赵允格,许明祥,王全九,等.黄土丘陵区退耕地生物结皮对土壤理化性状的影响[J].自然资源学报,2006,21(3):441-448.

高丽倩,赵允格,秦宁强,等.黄土丘陵区生物结皮对土壤可蚀性的影响[J].应用生态学报,2013,24(1):105-112.

李素清,李斌,张金屯.黄土高原植被数量区划研究[J].环境科学与技术,2005,28(3):60-62.

李玉山,韩仕峰,汪正华.黄土高原土壤水分性质及其分区[J].中国科学院西北水土保持研究所集刊(土壤分水与土壤肥力研究专集),1985(2):1-17.

李霞,李晓兵,王宏,等.气候变化对中国北方温带草原植被的影响[J].北京师范大学学报(自然科学版),2006,42(6):618-623.

鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000.

王小利,郭胜利,马玉红,等.黄土丘陵区小流域土地利用对土壤有机碳和全氮的影响[J].应用生态学报,2007,18(6):1281-1285.

林枫,王丽芳,文琦.黄土高原土壤有机碳固存对植被恢复的动态响应及其碳汇价值[J].水土保持研究,2021,28(3):53-58.

Gao L Q, Bowker M A, Xu M X, et al. Biological soil crusts decrease erodibility by modifying inherent soil properties on the Loess Plateau, China[J].Soil Biology and Biochemistry,2017,105:49-58.

Xu H K, Zhang Y J, Shao X Q, et al. Soil nitrogen and climate drive the positive effect of biological soil crusts on soil organic carbon sequestration in drylands: A Meta-analysis[J].Science of the Total Environment,2022,803:e150030.

徐加盼,李继洪,魏玉杰,等.不同母质类型发育土壤颗粒组成分形特征[J].土壤学报,2020,57(5):1197-1205.

浏览量

917

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

黄土丘陵区刺槐林土壤团聚体稳定性和土壤可蚀性动态变化

玉米与毛叶苕子及黑麦间作对土壤有机碳及其组分的影响

水力侵蚀驱动下土壤有机碳动态模型研究进展

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

生物结皮对植被混凝土边坡土壤团聚体分布及稳定性的影响