基于植被恢复的黄土高原典型流域次洪水沙特征分析

韩勇; 杨倩楠; 高海东; 许浩

doi:10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.034

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

基于植被恢复的黄土高原典型流域次洪水沙特征分析

更新时间：2025-03-12

- 基于植被恢复的黄土高原典型流域次洪水沙特征分析
- Runoff and Sediment Characteristics of Flood Event in Typical Watershed on the Loess Plateau Based on Vegetation Restoration
- 水土保持学报 2023年37卷第4期页码：278-283
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 安康学院旅游与资源环境学院,陕西,安康,725000
  2. 西安理工大学旱区生态水文与灾害防治国家林业和草原局重点实验室,西安,710048
- 作者简介：
  
  [ "韩勇(1987-),男,博士,讲师,主要从事土壤侵蚀及其环境演变研究。E-mail:hanyong2006@163.com" ]
- 基金信息：
  
  陕西省教育厅专项科研计划项目(21JK0464);陕西省科技厅自然科学基础研究计划青年项目(2021JQ-835);安康学院创新团队引导计划项目(2019AYQJ14);国家自然科学基金项目(42177336)
- DOI：10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.034
  中图分类号： S157.1
- 纸质出版：2023
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
韩勇, 杨倩楠, 高海东, 等. 基于植被恢复的黄土高原典型流域次洪水沙特征分析[J]. 水土保持学报, 2023,37(4):278-283.

HAN Yong, YANG Qiannan, GAO Haidong, et al. Runoff and Sediment Characteristics of Flood Event in Typical Watershed on the Loess Plateau Based on Vegetation Restoration[J]. 2023, 37(4): 278-283.
韩勇, 杨倩楠, 高海东, 等. 基于植被恢复的黄土高原典型流域次洪水沙特征分析[J]. 水土保持学报, 2023,37(4):278-283. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.034.

HAN Yong, YANG Qiannan, GAO Haidong, et al. Runoff and Sediment Characteristics of Flood Event in Typical Watershed on the Loess Plateau Based on Vegetation Restoration[J]. 2023, 37(4): 278-283. DOI： 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2023.04.034.

摘要

研究大规模植被恢复条件下岔巴沟流域次洪水沙变化

对揭示黄土高原土壤侵蚀演变规律和黄河水沙调控具有重要作用。基于101场洪水事件

结合NDVI和降雨数据

通过分析不同生态建设时期岔巴沟流域次洪水沙变化特征

选取2场典型洪水事件进行对比

揭示次洪输沙与径流侵蚀能量的关系。结果表明:时期Ⅱ的次洪平均径流量是时期I的1.86倍

但平均输沙量仅为0.52倍。在4个洪峰流量分级中

时期I的次洪平均输沙模数明显高于时期Ⅱ。与NO.2洪水事件相比

NO.100洪水事件的径流过程和输沙过程具有良好的同步性

洪水历时更长

洪峰流量、输沙峰值明显较低。时期I和Ⅱ的次洪输沙模数均随径流侵蚀功率的增加而增加

但时期Ⅱ的输沙模数整体低于时期I。研究结果表明大规模植被恢复对黄土高原典型流域次洪输沙的调控作用较径流更为显著。

Abstract

To analyze runoff and sediment change of flood event in the Chabagou watershed under the condition of large-scale vegetation restoration plays an important role in revealing the evolution law of soil erosion on the Loess Plateau and the regulation of runoff and sediment in the Yellow River. Based on 101 flood events

combined with NDVI and rainfall data

the paper analyzed runoff and sediment characteristics of flood event in Chabagou watershed during different ecological construction periods

and selected two typical flood events for comparison to reveal the relationship between sediment transport and runoff erosion energy. The results showed that the average runoff amount of flood event in Period Ⅱ was 1.86 times that of Period I

but the average sediment yield was only 0.52 times. In the four peak discharge classifications

the average sediment transport modulus of flood event in Period I was significantly higher than that in Period Ⅱ. Compared with the flood event NO.2

the runoff and sediment transport process of NO.100 in Period Ⅱ showed good synchronization

and the flood duration was longer. In addition

the peak flow and peak sediment transport were significantly lower. The sediment transport modulus of flood event in both periods I and Ⅱ increased with the increase of runoff erosion power

but the sediment transport modulus in Period Ⅱ was lower than that in Period I. The results showed that large-scale vegetation restoration played a more significant role in regulating sediment transport of flood event than runoff in typical watershed on the Loess Plateau.

关键词

Keywords

references

杨大文,雷慧闽,丛振涛.流域水文过程与植被相互作用研究现状评述[J].水利学报,2010,41(10):1142-1149.

Scott D F, Lesch W. Stream flow responses to afforestation with eucalytus grandis and pinus patula and to felling in the Mokobulaan experiments on annual and dry Africa[J].Journal of Hydrology,1997,199:360-377.

徐宪立,马克明,傅伯杰,等.植被与水土流失关系研究进展[J].生态学报,2006,26(9):3137-3143.

张炳勋,冯国章.林地拦洪作用及产流特点的分析[J].水文,1985(2):37-44.

顾朝军,穆兴民,孙文义,等.极端暴雨洪水及侵蚀产沙对延河流域植被恢复响应的比较研究[J].自然资源学报,2017,32(10):1755-1767.

刘元昊,韩剑桥,焦菊英,等.极端暴雨下小流域洪峰对植被和梯田的响应:以山东临朐台风"利奇马"暴雨为例[J].水土保持学报,2020,34(5):20-25.

Hewlett J D, Bosch J M. The dependence of storm flows on rainfall intensity and vegetal cover in South Africa[J].Journal of Hydrology,1984,75(1/4):365-381.

Calder I. Land use impacts on water resources[J].Land Use and Water Resources Research,2000,2:1-14.

孙惠南.近20年来关于森林作用研究的进展[J].自然资源学报,2001,16(5):407-412.

刘昌明,钟骏襄.黄土高原森林对年径流影响的初步分析[J].地理学报,1978,32(2):112-127.

李玉山.黄土高原森林植被对陆地水循环影响的研究[J].自然资源学报,2001,16(5):427-432.

陈军锋,李秀彬.森林植被变化对流域水文影响的争论[J].自然资源学报,2001,16(5):474-480.

黄明斌,康绍忠,李玉山.黄土高原沟壑区森林和草地小流域水文行为的比较研究[J].自然资源学报,1999,14(3):226-231.

Hu J F, Zhao G J, Mu X M, et al. Effect of soil and water conservation measures on regime-based suspended sediment load during floods[J].Sustainable Cities and Society,2020,55:e102044.

Ran Q H, Zong X Y, Ye S, et al. Dominant mechanism for annual maximum flood and sediment events generation in the Yellow River Basin[J].Catena,2020,187:e104376.

Hornbeck J W, Adams M B, Corbett E S, et al. Long-term impacts of forest treatments on water yield: A summary for northeastern USA[J].Journal of Hydrology,1993,150:323-344.

Borga M, Stoffel M, Marchi L, et al. Hydrogeomorphic response to extreme rainfall in headwater systems: Flash floods and debris flows[J].Journal of Hydrology,2014,518:194-205.

王万忠,焦菊英.黄土高原沟道降雨产流产沙过程变化的统计分析[J].水土保持通报,1996,16(6):12-18.

莫淑红,巩瑶,李洁,等.人类活动对岔巴沟流域洪水过程影响研究[J].应用基础与工程科学学报,2019,27(3):492-508.

Fu S H, Yang Y F, Liu B Y, et al. Flow rate response to vegetation and terraces under extreme rainstorms[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environmen,2020,288:e106714.

鲁克新,李占斌,李鹏,等.基于径流侵蚀功率的流域次暴雨输沙模型研究:以岔巴沟流域为例[J].长江科学院院报,2008,25(3):31-34.

Zhang L T, Li Z B, Wang H, et al. Influence of intra-event-based flood regime on sediment flow behavior from a typical agro-catchment of the Chinese Loess Plateau[J].Journal of Hydrology,2016,538:71-81.

Jia S F, Zhu W, Lv A, et al. A statictical downscaling algorithm of TRMM precipitation based on NDVI and DEM in the Qaidam Basin of China[J].Remote Sensing of Environment,2011,115(12):3069-3079.

Hu J F, Gao P, Mu XM, et al. Runoff-sediment dynamics under different flood patterns in a Loess Plateau catchment, China[J],Catena,2019,173:234-245.

水利部黄河水利委员会.中华人民共和国水文年鉴.第4卷.黄河流域水文资料第3册黄河中游区上段(河口镇至龙门)[Z].郑州:水利部黄河水利委员会,1970-1990,2006-2018.

杨倩楠,李占斌,鲁克新,等.干旱区河流基流变化特征及归因分析:以无定河流域为例[J].台湾水利,2019,66(4):67-75.

王文婷,殷水清,袁莹莹.场次降水与日降水差异对比[J].北京师范大学学报,2018,54(2):224-231.

章文波,谢云,刘宝元.用雨量和雨强计算次降雨侵蚀力[J].地理研究,2002,21(3):384-390.

Shi P, Feng Z H, Gao H D, et al. Has "Grain for Green" threaten food security on the Loess Plateau of China?[J].Ecosystem Health and Sustainability,2020,6:e1709560.

Ye S, Ran Q H, Fu X D, et al. Emergent stationarity in Yellow River sediment transport and the underlying shift of dominance: From streamflow to vegetation[J].Hydrology and Earth System Sciences,2019,23:549-556.

Huang M B, Zhang L, Gallichand J. Runoff responses to afforestation in a watershed of the Loess Plateau, China[J].Hydrological Precesses,2003,17:2599-2609.

Li C J, Pan C Z. The relative importance of different grass components in controlling runoff and erosion on a hillslope under simulated rainfall[J].Journal of Hydrology,2018,558:90-103.

Zhang J J, Gao G Y, Fu B J, et al. Formulating an elasticity approach to quantify the effects of climate variability and ecological restoration on sediment discharge change in the Loess Plateau, China[J].Water Resources Research,2019,55:9604-9622.

Buendia C, Bussi G, Tuset J, et al. Effects of afforestation on runoff and sediment load in an upland Mediterranean catchment[J].Science of the Total Environment,2016,540:144-157.

余魏競,丁文峰,刘宇轩,等.基于典型次洪泥沙动力学过程的岔巴沟流域水沙关系分析[J].长江科学院院报,2020,37(11):20-26.

王振飞.子洲县退耕还林(草)之我见[J].陕西水利,2002(2):25.

翟婷婷,赵广举,穆兴民,等.黄河中游典型流域极端降雨条件的水沙过程变化[J].泥沙研究,2021,46(1):57-63,41.

姜泓旭,田鹏,穆兴民,等.不同时间尺度孤山川流域水沙关系变化及驱动因素[J].水土保持学报,2020,34(2):86-92,215.

雷孝章,杨玉坡,赵文谦.森林对坡面流的影响研究[J].四川水力发电,2001,20(增刊1):51-53.

王健,吴发启,蒋学玮.作物覆盖与径流能量的关系[J].人民黄河,2005,27(8):34-36,64.

蒋忙舟.黄土高原典型退耕草地植被特征对土壤入渗过程的影响[J].水土保持学报,2022,36(4):99-104,111.

谭学进,穆兴民,高鹏,等.黄土区植被恢复对土壤物理性质的影响[J].中国环境科学,2019,39(2):713-722.

浏览量

991

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

1982—2020年黄河流域多时间尺度气象干旱对植被影响

秦巴山地极端气候变化特征及其对植被动态的影响

2000—2020年青海河湟谷地植被NDVI时空变化及影响因素

2002-2020年黄土高原土壤水变化及其相关性分析

2000-2020年湟水流域植被NDVI变化及其驱动力分析