PDF Download

[1]ZENG Danjuan,XU Guangping,HUANG Yuqing,et al.Study on Different Forest Litter and Soil Water-holding Capacity in Guangxi North Gulf Economic Zone[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2015,22(04):210-213,220.

Copy

Study on Different Forest Litter and Soil Water-holding Capacity in Guangxi North Gulf Economic Zone

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 22 Number of periods: 2015 04 Page number: 210-213,220 Column: Public date: 2015-08-28

Title:: Study on Different Forest Litter and Soil Water-holding Capacity in Guangxi North Gulf Economic Zone

Author(s):: ZENG Danjuan, XU Guangping, HUANG Yuqing, MO Ling, ZHANG Zhongfeng, HE Chengxin, LI Xiankun; Guangxi Key Laboratory of Plant Conservation and Restoration Ecology in Karst Terrain, Guangxi Institute of Botany, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region and Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guilin, Guanxi 541006, China

Keywords:: North Gulf Economic Zone; litter; water-holding ability; physical characteristics of soil

CLC:: S714

DOI:: -

Abstract:: Through the study on litter and soil water-holding capacity 5 representative ecosystems in Guangxi North Gulf Economic Zone, the results showed that the accumulation amount of litter was in the order of Fangchenggang > Shiwanshan > Damingshan > Medicinal Herb Garden > Yellow Camellia Natural Reserve; the maximum water-holding rate was in the order of Medicinal Herb Garden > Damingshan > Yellow Camellia Natural Reserve > Shiwanshan > Fangchenggang; the maximum water-holding capacity was in the order of Damingshan > Shiwanshan > Yellow Camellia Natural Reserve > Medicinal Herb Garden > Fangchenggang. The total porosity and capillary porosity in 0—20 cm soil were in the order of Damingshan > Shiwanshan > Medicinal Herb Garden > Yellow Camellia Natural Reserve > Fangchenggang. The capillary and the maximum water-holding capacity were largest in Damingshan, reaching to 882.6 g/kg and 954.9 g/kg, respectively, while the lowest ones were only 231.3 g/kg and 269.0 g/kg in Fangchenggang.

References:: [1] 陈奇伯,解明曙,张洪江.森林枯落物影响地表径流和土壤侵蚀研究动态[J].北京林业大学学报,1994,16(3):88-97.
[2] 姜海燕,赵雨森,陈祥伟,等.大兴安岭岭南几种主要森林类型土壤水文功能研究[J].水土保持学报,2007,21(3):149-153.
[3] 闫文德,张学龙.祁连山森林枯落物水文作用的研究[J].西北林学院学报,1997,12(2):7-14.
[4] 程金花,张洪江,史玉虎,等.三峡库区几种林下枯落物的水文作用[J].北京林业大学学报,2003,25(2):8-13.
[5] 赵鸿雁,吴钦孝.黄土高原几种枯枝落叶吸水机理研究[J].防护林科技,1996(4):15-18.
[6] 陈洪松,王克林.岩溶干旱特征及其治理对策[C]//湖南省农业系统工程学会常务理事会暨青年学术委员会会议论文集,2004.
[7] 樊登星,余新晓,岳永杰,等.北京西山不同林分枯落物层持水特性研究[J].北京林业大学学报,2008,30(2):177-181.
[8] Beasley R S, Granillo A B. Soil protection by natural vegetation on clearcut forest land in Arkansas[J]. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation,1985,40(4):379-382.
[9] 周祥,赵一鹤,张洪江.云南高原典型林分林下枯落物持水特征研究[J].生态环境学报,2011,20(2):248-252.
[10] 田月亮,张金池,李海东,等.不同林分类型土壤水分物理性质及其海拔效应:以浙江省凤阳山为例[J].水土保持通报,2013,33(1):53-56.
[11] 徐学华,张慧,王海东,等.太行山前南峪旅游区3种典型林分枯落物持水特性的研究[J].水土保持学报,2013,27(6):108-112.
[12] 张腾达,陶建平,王玉平.两种生境下不同生活型植物凋落叶的持水特性[J].生态学杂志,2014,33(2):310-315.
[13] 高开通,胡淑萍,刘鹏举,等.北京九龙山自然保护区典型林分枯落物水文效应研究[J].水土保持研究,2013,20(5):160-164.
[14] 温远光,黄棉.大明山中山植被恢复过程植物物种多样性的变化[J].植物生态学报,1998,22(1):33-40.
[15] 梁士楚,刘镜法,梁铭忠.北仑河口国家级自然保护区红树植物群落研究[J].广西师范大学学报:自然科学版,2004,22(2):70-76.
[16] 庞洁,卢广昌,和太平,等.广西防城金花茶自然保护区金花茶所在植物群落优势种的种间关联分析[J].广西科学院学报,2010,26(2):110-115.
[17] 和太平.广西十万大山国家级自然保护区植物区系研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报:自然科学版,2007,35(7):75-84.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 1900-01-01