[1]Zhang Ziji,Wang Qixin,Zhao Zhenyu,et al.Soil Improvement Effect of Different Economic Forest Planting Modes in South-central Shandong Province[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2024,31(05):102-111.[doi:10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2024.05.021]
Copy
Soil Improvement Effect of Different Economic Forest Planting Modes in South-central Shandong Province
Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume:
31
Number of periods:
2024 05
Page number:
102-111
Column:
Public date:
2024-08-10
- Title:
- Soil Improvement Effect of Different Economic Forest Planting Modes in South-central Shandong Province
- Keywords:
- soil moisture physics; soil organic carbon; soil nutrients; economic forest; soil improvement
- CLC:
- S714.6
- DOI:
- 10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2024.05.021
- Abstract:
- [Objective]The aims of this study are to explore the effects of different economic forest planting modes on soil water physical properties and soil nutrients in central and southern Shandong, and to provide a basis for screening and planting management of soil and water conservation economic forest planting modes in this area. [Methods]Four kinds of economic forest planting modes in Menglianggu small watershed of Mengyin County, Linyi City, were selected as the research objects, including A. persica(TS), C. pinnatifida(SZ), M. pumila+P. pseudocerasus(PY), and C. mollissima+Z. bungeanum(BH), with wasteland(CK )as the control. The water physical indexes such as soil bulk density, porosity and water storage capacity, and the nutrient indexes such as soil organic carbon, total nitrogen, total phosphorus and available nutrients were measured and analyzed. The soil improvement effect was comprehensively evaluated by principal component analysis and fuzzy mathematics membership function method. [Results](1 Economic forest planting could improve soil porosity and water storage performance. Compared with CK, the four economic forest planting patterns could reduce soil bulk density by 7.3%～22.1%, increase capillary porosity by 14.2%～42.0%, and increase soil maximum water storage by 16.5%～43.8%. The soil water holding capacity decreased in the order:TS>PY>BH>SZ>CK. In addition to PY, other economic forest planting patterns could effectively increase soil storage and storage precipitation, showing BH>TS>SZ>CK. The effect of economic forest planting on the storage precipitation and effective storage capacity of 0—20 cm soil layer was more obvious. Compared with 0—20 cm soil layer, the porosity and maximum water storage capacity of 20—40 cm soil layer decreased, and the change range of TS was the smallest.(2)Economic forest planting could improve soil organic carbon and available nutrients. Compared with CK, the four economic forest planting patterns could increase soil organic carbon by 6.9%～270.4%, which was expressed as TS>PY>BH>SZ>CK; the contents of total nitrogen and total phosphorus in soil decreased in the oder:TS>PY>BH>SZ>CK. The effect of economic forest planting on the nutrient content of 0—20 cm soil layer was more obvious. Compared with 0—20 cm soil layer, the nutrient content of 20—40 cm soil layer decreased.(3)The indicators reflecting the soil improvement effect of economic forest planting modes could be summarized into three categories. The first was soil capillary water holding characteristics and nutrient characteristics, the second was soil water storage characteristics, and the third was soil non-capillary water holding characteristics. [Conclusion]The comprehensive evaluation of soil improvement effect of different economic forest planting modes is:A. persica>C. mollissima+Z. bungeanum>M. pumila+P. pseudocerasus>C. pinnatifida>wasteland. Compared with grassland, economic forest planting can significantly improve the physical properties of soil moisture and improve soil nutrient performance, but the soil improvement effect varies greatly with different planting modes. In the arid and barren mountainous areas of central and southern Shandong, the planting mode of A. persica has the best effect on soil improvement, followed by C. mollissima+Z. bungeanum, and C. pinnatifida is relatively poor.
- References:
-
[1]夏江宝,曲志远,朱玮,等.鲁中山区不同人工林土壤水分特征[J].中国水土保持科学,2005,3(3):45-50.
Xia J B, Qu Z Y, Zhu W, et al. Soil water characteristics of different artificial forest in mountainous area in the middle of Shandong Province[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2005,3(3):45-50.
[2]黄永珍,王晟强,叶绍明.杉木林分类型对表层土壤团聚体有机碳及养分变化的影响[J].应用生态学报,2020,31(9):2857-2865.
Huang Y Z, Wang S Q, Ye S M. Effects of Cunninghamia lanceolata stand types on the changes of aggregate-related organic carbon and nutrients in surface soil[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2020,31(9):2857-2865.
[3]Shao G D, Ai J J, Sun Q W, et al. Soil quality assessment under different forest types in the Mount Tai, central Eastern China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2020,115:106439.
[4]王森浩,朱怡静,王玉芳,等.西沙群岛主要岛屿不同植被类型对土壤理化性质的影响[J].热带亚热带植物学报,2019,27(4):383-390.
Wang S H, Zhu Y J, Wang Y F, et al. Effect of vegetation types on soil physicochemical property in East Island and Yongxing Island of Xisha Islands[J]. Journal of Tropical and Subtropical Botany, 2019,27(4):383-390.
[5]Toková L, Igaz D, Horák J, et al. Effect of biochar application and re-application on soil bulk density, porosity, saturated hydraulic conductivity, water content and soil water availability in a silty loam haplic luvisol[J]. Agronomy, 2020,10(7):1005.
[6]罗维成,赵文智,孙程鹏,等.科尔沁沙地樟子松(Pinus sylvestris)人工固沙林演变过程中物种多样性和土壤水分特征[J].中国沙漠,2018,38(1):126-132.
Luo W C, Zhao W Z, Sun C P, et al. Changes in species composition, diversity and soil water content of Pinus sylvestris artificial sand-fixation forest along an afforestation successional gradient in Horqin[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2018,38(1):126-132.
[7]陈赫男,苗晓靖,程传民,等.泰安市黄前东小流域经济林改良土壤效果研究[J].中国水土保持,2009(3):37-38.
Chen H N, Miao X J, Cheng C M, et al. Effect of soil improvement through planting economic trees of Huangqiandong small watershed of Taian city[J]. Soil and Water Conservation in China, 2009(3):37-38.
[8]徐雅洁,郭月峰,姚云峰,等.不同林分配置对土壤水分物理性质的影响[J].四川农业大学学报,2021,39(3):370-377.
Xu Y J, Guo Y F, Yao Y F, et al. Effect of different forest-stand configuration on soil-moisture physical properties[J]. Journal of Sichuan Agricultural University, 2021,39(3):370-377.
[9]梁世兴,王娅茹,曹航,等.冀西北不同林分类型土壤贮水与入渗特征[J].林业与生态科学,2022,37(3):246-250.
Liang S X, Wang Y R, Cao H, et al. Characteristics of soil water storage and infiltration in different forest types in northwest Hebei Province[J]. Forestry and Ecological Sciences, 2022,37(3):246-250.
[10] 兰道云,毕华兴,赵丹阳,等.晋西黄土区不同密度油松人工林保育土壤功能评价[J].水土保持学报,2022,36(2):189-196.
Lan D Y, Bi H X, Zhao D Y, et al. Evaluation on soil conservation function of Pinus tabulaeformis plantation with different densities in the loess area of western Shanxi Province[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2022,36(2):189-196.
[11]曹裕,居玛汗·卡斯木,范鹏,等.陕西洛川旱塬苹果园地深层土壤水分和养分特征[J].应用生态学报,2013,24(2):388-396.
Cao Y, Jumahan K, Fan P, et al. Moisture and nutrient characteristics of deep layer soil in apple orchards on the Luochuan highland of Shaanxi, Northwest China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2013,24(2):388-396.
[12]Lee K L, Ong K H, King P J H, et al. Stand productivity, carbon content, and soil nutrients in different standages of Acacia mangium in Sarawak, Malaysia[J]. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 2015,39(1):154-161.
[13]夏江宝,许景伟,李传荣,等.黄河三角洲退化刺槐林地的土壤水分生态特征[J].水土保持通报,2010,30(6):75-80.
Xia J B, Xu J W, Li C R, et al. Ecological characteristics of soil moisture in degraded Robinia pseucdoacacia plantation in Yellow River Delta area[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2010,30(6):75-80.
[14]夏江宝,刘玉亭,朱金方,等.黄河三角洲莱州湾柽柳低效次生林质效等级评价[J].应用生态学报,2013,24(6):1551-1558.
Xia J B, Liu Y T, Zhu J F, et al. Quality level assessment of lowly efficient Tamarix chinensis secondary shrubs in Laizhou Bay of Yellow River Delta[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2013,24(6):1551-1558.
[15]马骞,于兴修,刘前进,等.沂蒙山区土壤侵蚀空间分布及其影响因素动态变化[J].中国农业科学,2010,43(22):4652-4662.
Ma Q, Yu X X, Liu Q J, et al. Research on dynamic change of soil erosion distribution and its controlling factors in Yimeng Mountainous area of China[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2010,43(22):4652-4662.
[16]丛日亮,黄进,张金池,等.苏南丘陵区主要林分类型土壤抗蚀性分析[J].生态环境学报,2010,19(8):1862-1867.
Cong R L, Huang J, Zhang J C, et al. Analysis of soil anti-erodibility of main forest types in the south hilly region of Jiangsu Province[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2010,19(8):1862-1867.
[17]云慧雅,毕华兴,王珊珊,等.不同林分类型土壤理化特征及其对土壤入渗过程的影响[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(6):183-189.
Yun H Y, Bi H X, Wang S S, et al. Soil physical and chemical characteristics of different forest types and their effects on soil infiltration process[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2021,35(6):183-189.
[18]洪宜聪.杉木闽粤栲混交林分特征与水土保持功能研究[J].江苏林业科技,2016,43(5):18-24.
Hong Y C. Study on the characteristics and function of soil and water conservation of Cunninghamia lanceolata and Castanopsis fissa mixed forest[J]. Journal of Jiangsu Forestry Science & Technology, 2016,43(5):18-24.
[19]蒲嘉霖,刘亮.亚热带森林凋落物分解特征及水文效应[J].水土保持研究,2019,26(6):165-170.
Pu J L, Liu L. Hydrology functions and decomposition characteristics of litter in subtropical forest[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019,26(6):165-170.
[20]史利江,高杉,姚晓军,等.晋西北黄土丘陵区不同植被恢复下的土壤碳氮累积特征[J].生态环境学报,2021,30(9):1787-1796.
Shi L J, Gao S, Yao X J, et al. Characteristics of soil carbon and nitrogen accumulation under different vegetation restoration in the loess hilly region of northwest Shanxi Province[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2021,30(9):1787-1796.
[21]富丽,赵锦梅,李永宁,等.陇东黄土高原不同林龄苹果林地枯落物及土壤的水文效应[J].水土保持通报,2018,38(5):40-45.
Fu L, Zhao J M, Li Y N, et al. Hydrological effects of litters and soil in apple tree plantation at different stand ages of Longdong Loess Plateau[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2018,38(5):40-45.
[22]柳京安,高鹏,高军侠,等.鲁中南山地干果经济林土壤水文生态特征[J].中国水土保持科学,2007,5(1):84-87,92.
Liu J A, Gao P, Gao J X, et al. Eco-hydrological characteristics of soil of economic dry fruits forest in hilly area of central south of Shandong Province[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2007,5(1):84-87,92.
[23]赵芳,李雪云,赖国桢,等.飞播马尾松林不同林下植被类型枯落物及土壤水文效应[J].中国水土保持科学,2016,14(4):26-33.
Zhao F, Li X Y, Lai G Z, et al. Hydrological effects of forest litters and soil in different types of understory vegetation in aerially-seeded Pinus massoniana plantation[J]. Science of Soil and Water Conservation, 2016,14(4):26-33.
[24]张方博,侯玉雪,敖园园,等.土壤紧实胁迫下根系-土壤的相互作用[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2021,27(3):531-543.
Zhang F B, Hou Y X, Ao Y Y, et al. Root-soil interaction under soil compaction[J]. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizers, 2021,27(3):531-543.
[25]杨淑琪,唐芬,杨桦,等.滇南地区桃树种植模式对土壤有机碳组分及碳库管理指数的影响[J].生态学报,2023,43(1):290-303.
Yang S Q, Tang F, Yang H, et al. Effects of peach tree planting patterns on soil organic carbon fractions and carbon pool management index in southern Yunnan[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2023,43(1):290-303.
[26]Liu T R, Peng D L, Tan Z J, et al. Effects of stand density on soil respiration and labile organic carbon in different aged Larix principis-rupprechtii plantations[J]. Ecological Processes, 2021,10(1):44.
[27]王金贵,李希来,李宗仁,等.青海超净区高寒草甸土壤有机碳及养分分布特征[J].生态环境学报,2018,27(2):232-238.
Wang J G, Li X L, Li Z R, et al. Distribution characteristics of soil organic carbon and nutrients in alpine meadow soils in a super clean area, Qinghai Province[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2018,27(2):232-238.
[28]刘晓民,白嘉骏,杨耀天.不同林分类型对鄂尔多斯市圪秋沟流域土壤碳库及稳定性的影响[J].水土保持通报,2022,42(5):360-367,397.
Liu X M, Bai J J, Yang Y T. Effects of different stand types on soil carbon pools and stability at Geqiugou watershed in Ordos City[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2022,42(5):360-367,397.
[29]黄晓露,戴勤,梁文汇,等.桂西北板栗园区土壤养分含量分析及评价[J].西南农业学报,2022,35(12):2827-2835.
Huang X L, Dai Q, Liang W H, et al. Analysis and evaluation of soil nutrient content in chestnut orchards in Northwest Guangxi[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2022,35(12):2827-2835.
[30]张鹤,费洪岩,韩凤朋,等.植被恢复和覆土厚度对砒砂岩区土壤水分及养分的影响[J].水土保持通报,2022,42(2):98-106.
Zhang H, Fei H Y, Han F P, et al. Effects of vegetation restoration and soil thickness on soil moisture and nutrient in feldspathic sandstone area[J]. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2022,42(2):98-106.
- Similar References:
Memo
-
Last Update:
2024-08-10