PDF Download

[1]YU Enxu,ZHANG Mingfang,JIANG Zhiwei,et al.Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Soil Erosion and Associated Influencing Factors in the Upper Minjiang River Watershed[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2023,30(01):1-10,17.[doi:10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2023.01.003]

Copy

Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Soil Erosion and Associated Influencing Factors in the Upper Minjiang River Watershed

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 30 Number of periods: 2023 01 Page number: 1-10,17 Column: Public date: 2023-01-10

Title:: Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Soil Erosion and Associated Influencing Factors in the Upper Minjiang River Watershed

Author(s):: YU Enxu¹, ZHANG Mingfang^1,2, JIANG Zhiwei¹, XU Yali¹, DENG Shiyu¹; (1.School of Resources and Environment, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 611731, China; 2.Yangtze Delta Region Institute(Huzhou), University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Huzhou, Zhejiang 313001, China)

Keywords:: upper Minjiang River watershed; soil erosion; dynamic evaluation; spatiotemporal characteristics; vegetation change

CLC:: S157

DOI:: 10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2023.01.003

Abstract:: The Universal Soil Loss Equation(USLE), statistical and partial correlation analysis were used to examine the spatiotemporal evolution and causes of soil erosion in the upper Minjiang River watershed from 2001 to 2017 in order to understand the dynamic change of soil erosion in this region. The results showed that:(1)soil erosion mainly occurred in the west, southwest, northeast, and southeast of the study area;(2)the areas with significant decrease of soil erosion mainly distributed in forestlands and the areas with the elevation from 2 500～5 000 m, slope gradient greater than 15° and annual precipitation of 800～1 200 mm in the west and southwest; the areas with significant increase of soil erosion mainly distributed in the north and southeast of the study area;(3)soil erosion was positively correlated with altitude, slope gradient, annual precipitation, and vegetation types(p< 0.05);(4)the soil erosion mostly distributed in undeveloped land, grassland, and woodland, and the erosion rates(the proportion of area of erosion classified as mild and above to each land use type)were 87.11%, 39.75%, and 9.49%, respectively;(5)the contributions of soil erosion intensities of or sparse woodland, coniferous forest, mixed forest, and broad-leaved forest to total erosion intensity were 15.04%, 13.50%, 4.41%, and 0.97% respectively; soil erosion in woodland was mainly affected by precipitation and vegetation coverage while that in shrub and grassland was mainly affected by precipitation. In conclusion, the soil erosion in the upper Minjiang River watershed had the distinct spatial and temporal variation, which was mainly determined by precipitation, topography and vegetation type. These findings can benefit the design of soil erosion control practices to protect natural environment in the upper Minjiang River watershed according to graphic and vegetation types.

References:: [1] 陈世发.基于GIS的亚热带山地土地利用与土壤侵蚀关系研究:以粤北山区为例[J].干旱区资源与环境,2015,29(2):80-85.
[2] 姜琳,边金虎,李爱农,等.岷江上游2000—2010年土壤侵蚀时空格局动态变化[J].水土保持学报,2014,28(1):18-25,35.
[3] 赵芹,唐瑶蔚,杜鹃.四川省水土保持监测点优化调整方案探讨[J].四川水利,2019,40(4):127-130.
[4] 孟兆鑫,邓玉林,刘武林.基于RS的岷江流域土壤侵蚀变化及其驱动力分析[J].地理与地理信息科学,2008,24(4):57-61.
[5] 李辉霞,周红艺.岷江上游地区水土流失危险度评价[J].中国水土保持,2009(10):22-24,64.
[6] 刘金山,倪福全,邓玉,等.岷江上游流域土壤侵蚀风险评估[J].南水北调与水利科技,2019,17(1):105-112.
[7] 龚雪梅,冯文兰,郑杰,等.岷江上游土壤侵蚀敏感性评价[J].干旱区资源与环境,2017,31(9):68-74.
[8] 刘艳锋,陈学华,贺秀斌,等.岷江上游土壤侵蚀与土地利用的耦合关系研究[J].西北林学院学报,2009,24(5):161-165,185.
[9] 何兴元,胡志斌,李月辉,等.GIS支持下岷江上游土壤侵蚀动态研究[J].应用生态学报,2005,16(12):2271-2278.
[10] 邓力濠,张明芳,师嘉祺,等.岷江杂谷脑流域典型天然林和人工林林地水文效应研究[J].西南林业大学学报:自然科学,2021,41(3):45-52.
[11] 师嘉祺,余恩旭,徐亚莉,等.气候变化下西南亚高山森林景观恢复效果模拟预测:以岷江杂谷脑河上游流域为例[J].应用与环境生物学报,2021,27(3):716-724.
[12] 管亚兵,杨胜天,赵长森,等.2000年以来岷江上游地区MODIS/NDVI动态变化[J].山地学报,2018,36(3):345-353.
[13] Yu E, Zhang M, Xu Y, et al. The development and application of a GIS-based tool to assess forest landscape restoration effects on water conservation capacity[J]. Forests, 2021,12(9):1291.
[14] 水利部.土壤侵蚀分类分级标准[S].北京:中国水利水电出版社,:SL190-2007,2008.
[15] 邓兵.区域生态服务价值关键参数遥感反演研究:以岷江上游地区为例[D].成都:成都理工大学,2016.
[16] Sedgwick P. Pearson's correlation coefficient[J]. BMJ: British Medical Journal(Online), 2012, 345.
[17] Zar J. Significance testing of the spearman rank correlation coefficient[J]. Journal of the American Statistical Assoxiation, 1972, 67(339):578-580.
[18] Yadolah D. The concise encyclopedia of statistics[M]. New York:Springer, 2008.
[19] 管河山,周丹.平稳性检验方法的有效性研究[J].南华大学学报:社会科学版,2016,17(1):63-68.
[20] 陈锐银,严冬春,文安邦,等.基于GIS/CSLE的四川省水土流失重点防治区土壤侵蚀研究[J].水土保持学报,2020,34(1):17-26.
[21] 刘雨佳.岷江上游土地利用变化与土壤侵蚀遥感研究[D].成都:成都理工大学,2020.
[22] 高军.岷江上游典型生态系统土壤保持功能研究[D].北京:中国科学院生态环境研究中心,2008.
[23] 康磊,刘世荣,刘宪钊.岷江上游景观格局与土壤侵蚀变化:以杂古脑流域为例[J].水土保持通报,2019,39(1):23-28,325.
[24] 杨青林,丁鹏凯,仙巍,等.川西北地区土壤侵蚀敏感性评价[J].人民长江,2018,49(10):30-35.
[25] 朱军,李益敏,蒋德明.基于GIS和RUSLE的高山峡谷区土壤侵蚀研究:以云南省泸水县为例[J].水土保持通报,2016,36(3):277-283,370.
[26] 祝聪,彭文甫,张丽芳,等.2006—2016年岷江上游植被覆盖度时空变化及驱动力[J].生态学报,2019,39(5):1583-1594.
[27] 张永旺.岷江上游泥石流活动区对干旱河谷面积变化的响应[D].四川绵阳:西南科技大学,2018.
[28] 王猛,王鹤松,姜超,等.基于RULSE和地理探测器模型的西南地区土壤侵蚀格局及定量归因[J].应用基础与工程科学学报,2021,29(6):1386-1402.
[29] 吕甚悟,李君莲.降雨及土壤湿度对水土流失的影响[J].土壤学报,1992,29(1):94-103.
[30] Li L, Li J, Yu R. Characteristics of summer regional rainfall events over Ili River Valley in Northwest China [J]. Atmospheric Research, 2020,243:104996.
[31] 张建平,樊宏,叶延琼.岷江上游土壤侵蚀及其防治对策[J].水土保持学报,2002,16(5):19-22.
[32] 邱国玉.基于RS和GIS的川西南天然林区植被覆盖变化及土壤侵蚀演变[D].成都:四川农业大学,2018.
[33] 师嘉祺.岷江上游杂谷脑流域森林景观恢复对关键生态功能的影响[D].成都:电子科技大学,2020.
[34] 胡胜,曹明明,刘琪,等.不同视角下InVEST模型的土壤保持功能对比[J].地理研究,2014,33(12):2393-2406.
[35] 陈童尧,贾燕锋,王佳楠,等.基于InVEST模型的祁连山国家级自然保护区土壤保持现状与功能[J].干旱区研究,2020,37(1):150-159.
[36] 袁志芬.基于InVEST模型的四川省宝兴县生态系统服务功能动态评估[D].湖南湘潭:湖南科技大学,2014.
[37] 徐茂其,张大泉.川中丘陵土壤水力侵蚀及防治对策[J].水土保持学报,1992,6(4):35-42.
[38] 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.
[39] 常畅,王耕.基于InVEST模型的碧流河流域土壤保持功能研究[J].国土与自然资源研究,2019(4):8-10.
[40] 何莎莎,朱文博,崔耀平,等.基于InVEST模型的太行山淇河流域土壤侵蚀特征研究[J].长江流域资源与环境,2019,28(2):426-439.
[41] 许洪娇,胡海波,初磊,等.香樟林地枯落物的截流减沙效应分析[J].中国水土保持科学:中英文,2021,19(2):86-91.
[42] 程良爽.岷江上游山地森林/干旱河谷交错带不同植被水源涵养效益[D].成都:四川农业大学,2010.
[43] 吴永波,郝奇林,薛建辉,等.岷江上游主要森林群落枯落物量及其持水特性[J].中国水土保持科学,2009,7(3):67-72.
[44] 马志良,赵文强,刘美,等.岷江源头区乔灌交错带地被物和土壤持水能力[J].水土保持学报,2018,32(5):146-150.
[45] 田雨,周晓波,周燕,等.茂县大沟流域典型植被群落的水源涵养能力[J].四川林业科技,2014,35(1):14-17.
[46] 周玮,查同刚,孙怀宁,等.北京八达岭地区典型林分林地土壤抗蚀性分析[J].中国水土保持科学,2016,14(4):84-93.
[47] 刘宽梅,周秋文.典型喀斯特森林土壤的抗蚀性[J].生态学报,2020,40(2):568-577.
[48] 任改.重庆四面山主要植物群落土壤抗侵蚀性研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2010.
[49] 于大炮,刘明国,邓红兵,等.辽西地区林地土壤抗蚀性分析[J].生态学杂志,2003,22(5):10-14.
[50] 陈翠翠.岷江上游山地森林/干旱河谷交错带坡面径流侵蚀研究[D].成都:四川农业大学,2010.
[51] 丁海容,李勇,闫亮,等.汶川地震驱动的灾害链对岷江上游输沙量的影响[J].成都理工大学学报:自然科学版,2013,40(6):712-720.
[52] 田雨,方自力,谢强,等.岷江上游植被在汶川地震中的损毁及灾后恢复状况[J].长江流域资源与环境,2014,23(5):735-740.
[53] 贾磊,姚顺波,邓元杰,等.渭河流域土壤侵蚀时空特征及其地理探测[J].生态与农村环境学报,2021,37(3):305-314.
[54] 燕玲玲,巩杰,徐彩仙,等.子午岭地区土壤保持服务时空变化及其影响因素[J].水土保持学报,2021,35(1):188-197.
[55] 常梦迪,王新军,李娜,等.基于CSLE模型的天山北坡中段山区水力侵蚀时空变化特征及影响因素研究[J].干旱区研究,2021,38(4):939-949.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 2023-01-10