[1]WEN Lu,LIU Jing-lan,XI Yan,et al.Analysis on Soil Physical Properties of the Old Trees in Beijing[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2011,18(05):175-178.
Copy
Analysis on Soil Physical Properties of the Old Trees in Beijing
Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume:
18
Number of periods:
2011 05
Page number:
175-178
Column:
Public date:
2011-10-20
- Title:
- Analysis on Soil Physical Properties of the Old Trees in Beijing
- Keywords:
- old tree; soil water content; bulk density; soil porosity; soil compaction
- CLC:
- S714.2
- DOI:
- -
- Abstract:
- As the representative of old trees, Pinus bungeanaas, Pinus tabulaeformis, Platycladus orientalis and Sophora Japonica were selected as the examples. Adopting cutting ring method and drying method, their soil physical properties were determined and analyzed in order to provide an effective basis for evaluating health of old trees and direct the rejuvenation of old trees etc. The results show that: (1)average soil water content (SWC) was 10.6%, but the SWC of different tree species are not same, and it presented as Pinus bungeanaas>Pinus tabulaeformis>Sophora japonica>Platycladus orientalis; (2)the mean bulk density of soil samples was 1.20 g/cm3, and their differences were not significant; (3)the average total porosity, mean capillary porosity and medial non-capillary porosity of soil samples were 20.7%, 11.8%, 9.0%, respectively, and there were not obvious differences among these soils supporing these species, the soil permeability is not good; (4) mean soil compaction is 2.19 kg/m2, and the regional differences are significant. In this study, we could initially determine that the soil physical conditions for the 4 tree species were not the suitable ones for plant growth.
- References:
-
[1] 胡坚强,夏有根,梅艳,等.古树名木研究概述[J].福建林业科技,2004,31(3):151.
[2] 王夏晖,王益权,Kuznetsov M S.黄土高原几种主要土壤的物理性质研究[J].水土保持学报,2000,14(4):99-103.
[3] 刘伟钦,陈步峰,尹光天,等.顺德地区不同森林改造区土壤水分-物理特性研究[J].林业科学研究,2003,16(4):495-500.
[4] 乌云.大青山油松人工林土壤物理特性及水分动态研究[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2008.
[5] 李启洪,何佩云.一、二代马尾松人工林土壤物理性质的比较:以贵州龙里为例[J].贵州师范大学学报:自然科学版,2010,28(2):13-16.
[6] 刘晚苟,山仑,邓西平.植物对土壤紧实度的反应[J].植物生理学通讯,2001,37(3):254-260.
[7] 张志云,蔡学林,黎祖尧,等.土壤物理性与林木生长关系的研究[J].江西农业大学学报,1991,13(1):28-32.
[8] 刘克锋,龚学,袁跃云,等.天坛公园土壤研究:Ⅲ.古树生长区围栏效果分析[J].北京农学院学报,1994,9(1):15-21.
[9] 刘克锋,王静,王衍庆,等.北京市十大公园土壤性状及其改良利用的研究[J].北京农学院学报,1994,9(2):25-44.
[10] Tran Huong Mai.Quantifying the effects of sawdust application on soil chemical and physical properties and corn yield[D].Knoxville Tennessee,US:The University of Tennessee,2005.
[11] Figueiredo Matosinho de Sauza.The relationship of certain soil physical properties to root distribution,nutrient absorption,and yield of corn and soy beans planted in three row arrangements [D].Knoxville Tennessee,US:The University of Tennessee,1975.
[12] Richard P,刘凤红.寻找北京古树[J].生命世界,2009(1):66-71.
[13] 张宝贵.北京的古树名木[J].北京规划建设,2000(3):60-62.
[14] 郭中领,付素华,王向亮,等.北京地区表层土壤分形特征研究[J].水土保持通报,2010,30(2):154-158.
[15] 郑晓飞.十三陵景区古松柏树衰弱原因及养护复壮措施综述[J].北京园林,2010,26(91):54-57.
[16] 卢欣艳,牛树奎,任云卯.北京西山林场可燃物含水率与气象要素关系[J].林业资源管理,2010(3):79-86.
[17] 中国科学院南京土壤研究所.土壤理化分析[M].上海:上海科学技术出版社,1978.
[18] 孙艳红,张洪江,程金花,等.缙云山不同林地类型土壤特性及其水源涵养功能[J].水土保持学报,2006,20(2):106-109.
[19] 李梅,杨万勤,肖艳,等.干扰对毕棚沟生态旅游区土壤物理性质的影响[J].中国农学通报,2010,26(14):303-307.
[20] 马维伟.兰州北山侧柏人工林地土壤水分物理特征研究[D].兰州:甘肃农业大学,2008.
[21] 龚元石,廖超子,李保国.土壤含水量和容重的空间变异及其分形特征[J].土壤学报,1998,35(1):10-15.
[22] 林培松,谢细香,罗锦红.梅江区不同森林类型土壤物理性质研究[J].安徽农业科学,2008,36(31):13739-13740.
[23] 刘尧让,于法展,李淑芬,等.苏北山丘区森林群落次生演替中土壤物理性质及其持水性能研究[J].水土保持研究,2010,17(3):135-139.
[24] 田大伦,陈书军.樟树人工林土壤水文-物理性质特征分析[J].中南林学院学报,2005,25(2):1-6.
[25] 焦彩强,王益权,刘军,等.关中地区耕作方法与土壤紧实度时空变异及其效应分析[J].干旱地区农业研究,2009,27(3):7-12.
[26] 聂立水,王登芝,王保国.北京戒台寺古油松生长衰退与土壤条件关系初步研究[J].北京林业大学学报,2005,27(5):32-36.
[27] 刘秀琴.兰州市古树名木调查及保护研究[D].兰州:兰州大学,2009.
[28] 张瑞平.北京古树衰弱原因分析[J].建设科技,2009(5):98-99.
- Similar References:
Memo
-
Last Update:
1900-01-01