PDF Download

[1]TONG Shan,CAO Guangchao,ZHANG Zhuo,et al.Analysis of the Spatial and Temporal Changes and Migration Characteristics of Soil Erosion in the South Slope of Qilian Mountain[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2022,29(04):18-27.

Copy

Analysis of the Spatial and Temporal Changes and Migration Characteristics of Soil Erosion in the South Slope of Qilian Mountain

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 29 Number of periods: 2022 04 Page number: 18-27 Column: Public date: 2022-06-20

Title:: Analysis of the Spatial and Temporal Changes and Migration Characteristics of Soil Erosion in the South Slope of Qilian Mountain

Author(s):: TONG Shan^1,2,3, CAO Guangchao^2,3, ZHANG Zhuo^1,2,3, YAN Xin^1,2,3, DIAO Erlong^1,2,3; (1.College of Geographical Sciences, Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810008, China; 2.Qinghai Key Laboratory of Natural Geography and Environmental Process, Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810008, China; 3.Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Ecological Conservation of the Ministry of Education, Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, Xining 810008, China)

Keywords:: soil erosion; spatial and temporal change; migration distance; different administrative divisions; main vegetation types

CLC:: S157.1

DOI:: -

Abstract:: Soil erosion is an important factor that threatens human ecological environment and social economy. In order to achieve more effective protection and management of land resources, based on the RUSLE model and GIS/RS spatial information technology, we analyzed and discussed the temporal and spatial changes of soil erosion and the migration characteristics of soil erosion gravity center on the southern slope of Qilianshan Mountains from 2000 to 2019. The results show that the soil erosion modulus on the southern slope of Qilianshan Mountain presented a decreasing trend from northwest to southeast in terms of spatial variation; the average soil erosion modulus increased from 1 966.63 t/(km²·a)in 2000 to 3 228.51 t/(km²·a)in 2005, and finally dropped to 2 299.06 t/(km²·a)in 2019; the amount of grassland soil erosion was the largest, which was 2.65×10⁷～4.25×10⁷ t/a, although the erosion was relatively serious, the center of gravity of soil erosion did not move significantly; among the five counties, Qilian County had the most severe soil erosion and the largest migration distance of the center of gravity; the amount of erosion was between 3.01×10⁷ t/aand 4.83×10⁷ t/a, the total migration was 351.89 m, and the migration rate was 17.59 m/a, indicating that soil erosion in Qilian County was unstable, and low-grade soil erosion easily transformed into high-grade erosion; the largest glacier migration in land use types was 367.78 m, the migration rate was 18.39 m/a. It is concluded that fixed-point treatment can be adopted for areas with less soil erosion and little center of gravity migration, and Qilian County should be monitored for a long time, and the comprehensive treatment project of soil and water conservation in Qilian County should be fully promoted to alleviate soil erosion. Compared with other ecological system, the grassland and forestland should be strengthened.

References:: [1] 孙鸿烈.我国水土流失问题与防治对策[J].中国水利,2011(6):16.
[2] 方广玲,香宝,赵卫,等.基于GIS和RUSLE的拉萨河流域土壤侵蚀研究[J].水土保持学报,2015,29(3):6-12.
[3] 周佳宁.内蒙古多伦县土壤侵蚀与LUCC的时空耦合关系研究[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2017.
[4] 蔡崇法,丁树文,史志华,等.应用USLE模型与地理信息系统IDRISI预测小流域土壤侵蚀量的研究[J].水土保持学报,2000,14(2):19-24.
[5] Shi Z H, Cai C F, Ding S W, et al. Soil conservation planning at the small watershed level using RUSLE with GIS: a case study in the Three Gorge Area of China[J]. Catena,2004,55(1); 33-48.
[6] 俱战省,文安邦,严冬春,等.基于GIS和RUSLE的三峡库区小流域土壤侵蚀量估算研究[J].地球与环境,2015,43(3):331-337.
[7] Borrelli P, Marker M, Panagos P, et al. Modeling soil erosion and river sediment yield for an intermountain drainage basin of the Central Apennines, Ttaly [J]. Catena,2014,114:45-48.
[8] 陈峰,李红波.基于GIS和RUSLE的滇南山区土壤侵蚀时空演变:以云南省元阳县为例[J].应用生态学报,2021,32(2):629-637.
[9] 林锦阔.河西地区土壤侵蚀时空分异及其驱动因素[D].兰州:兰州大学,2020.
[10] 康琳琦,周天财,干友民,等.1984—2013年青藏高原土壤侵蚀时空变化特征[J].应用与环境生物学报,2018,24(2):245-253.
[11] 林慧龙,郑舒婷,王雪璐.基于RUSLE模型的三江源高寒草地土壤侵蚀评价[J].草业学报,2017,26(7):11-22.
[12] 夏子书,白一茹,王幼奇,等.基于GIS和随机森林算法的宁东土壤饱和导水率分布与预测[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(1):285-293.
[13] 史广,刘庚,赵龙,等.基于多源环境数据和随机森林模型的农田土壤砷空间分布模拟[J].环境科学学报,2020,40(8):2993-3000.
[14] 郑利林,徐金英,王晓龙,等.基于随机森林方法研究鄱阳湖典型洲滩植被群落分布与表层土壤因子耦合关系[J].土壤,2020,52(2):378-385.
[15] 包青岭,丁建丽,王敬哲,等.基于随机森林算法的土壤有机质含量高光谱检测[J].干旱区地理,2019,42(6):1404-1414.
[16] 卢宏亮,赵明松,刘斌寅,等.基于随机森林模型的安徽省土壤属性空间分布预测[J].土壤,2019,51(3):602-608.
[17] 陈炜林.基于空间计量模型的重庆主城人口重心迁移驱动影响因素研究[D].重庆:重庆大学,2019.
[18] 赵珍珍,冯建迪.1980—2016年科尔沁沙地土地利用重心的时空迁移特征[J].水土保持通报,2019,39(4):256-260.
[19] 范俊甫,何惠馨,郭兵.1980—2015年黄河流域降雨侵蚀力时空变化分析[J].地球信息科学学报,2018,20(2):196-204.
[20] 童珊,曹广超,曹生奎.近34年祁连山南坡植被覆盖变化与气象因子关系研究[J].长江流域资源与环境,2020,29(12):2655-2664.
[21] 刘芳,曹广超,曹生奎,等.祁连山南坡水体氢氧稳定同位素特征研究[J].干旱区研究,2020,37(5):1116-1123.
[22] 魏健美,李常斌,武磊,等.基于USLE的甘南川西北土壤侵蚀研究[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(2):31-37.
[23] 陈红,江旭聪,任磊,等.基于RUSLE模型的淮河流域土壤侵蚀定量评价[J].土壤通报,2021,52(1):165-176.
[24] 林锦阔.基于RUSLE模型沂河流域土壤侵蚀研究[D].济南:山东师范大学,2017.
[25] 刘斌涛,陶和平,史展,等.青藏高原土壤可蚀性K值的空间分布特征[J].水土保持通报,2014,34(4):11-16.
[26] 符素华,刘宝元,周贵云,等.坡长坡度因子计算工具[J].中国水土保持科学,2015,13(5):105-110.
[27] 吴炳伦,孙华,石军南,等.2000—2018年深圳市植被覆盖动态变化与预测[J].应用生态学报,2020,31(11):3777-3785.
[28] 赵珍珍,冯建迪.1980—2016年科尔沁沙地土地利用重心的时空迁移特征[J].水土保持通报,2019,39(4):256-260.
[29] 肖智,黄贤金,孟浩,等.2009—2014年中国茶叶生产空间演变格局及变化特征[J].地理研究,2017,36(1):109-120.
[30] 黄娉婷,张晓平.大都市区工业重心时空变动轨迹分析:以天津市为例[J].经济地理,2012,32(3):89-95.
[31] Breiman L. Random forests [J]. Machine Learning, 2001,45:5-32.
[32] 方匡南,吴见彬,朱建平,等.随机森林方法研究综述[J].统计与信息论坛,2011,26(3):32-37.
[33] 韩丹,程先富,谢金红,等.大别山区江子河流域土壤有机质的空间变异及其影响因素[J].土壤学报,2012,49(2):403-408.
[34] 付建新,曹广超,李玲琴,等.1960—2014年祁连山南坡及其附近地区降水时空变化特征[J].水土保持研究,2018,25(4):152-161.
[35] 陈豪.基于USLE模型的祁连山国家公园土壤水力侵蚀动态分析[D].兰州:兰州大学,2020.
[36] 王根绪,丁永建,王建,等.近15年来长江黄河源区的土地覆被变化[J].地理学报,2004,59(2):163-173.
[37] 李宝海,杰布,李顺凯,等.藏北高原主要草地类型鼠害调查报告[J].西藏科技,2007(3):29-30.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 2022-06-20