PDF Download

[1]YUAN Fang,ZHANG Zhenshi,ZHANG Peng,et al.Path Analysis of Influencing Factors of Spatial Distribution of Biological Soil Crust in Small Watershed of Northern Shaanxi[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2015,22(06):30-35,41.

Copy

Path Analysis of Influencing Factors of Spatial Distribution of Biological Soil Crust in Small Watershed of Northern Shaanxi

Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume: 22 Number of periods: 2015 06 Page number: 30-35,41 Column: Public date: 2015-12-28

Title:: Path Analysis of Influencing Factors of Spatial Distribution of Biological Soil Crust in Small Watershed of Northern Shaanxi

Author(s):: YUAN Fang¹, ZHANG Zhenshi³, ZHANG Peng¹, BU Chongfeng^1,2; 1. Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Northwest A & F University, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China;
2. Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Ministry of Water Resources, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China;
3. Powerchina Northwest Engineering Corporation Limited, Xi’an, Shaanxi 710065, China

Keywords:: biological soil crust; spatial distribution; path analysis; influencing factors

CLC:: S157

DOI:: -

Abstract:: We chose a typical slope in the Loess Plateau, made a comprehensive survey and used the method of path analysis to study the spatial characteristics of the coverage and thickness of biological soil crusts (BSCs) and its relationship with environmental factors. The results showed that: (1) in the study area, BSCs distributed continuously in sand area, and the mean coverage was generally over 30%, while in loess area, it showed a discrete and sporadic distribution, and their coverage was generally below 20%, but thickness and shear strength of BSCs had no significant differences in the sand and loess area(p>0.05): (2) the path analysis showed that the soil texture was the direct factors (Direct path coefficient P_sand=0.720) and Artemisia desertorum Spreng coverage was the indirect factor (Indirect path coefficient P_sh,sand=0.422) which impacted on the coverage of BSCs, both of them had the promotion role in the coverage of BSCs, the direct positive effect and indirect negative effect of soil moisture content were fair, so the overall contribution was not obvious, direct and indirect effects of altitude were negative, Artemisia desertorum Spreng coverage was the direct factors (P_sh=0.329) and slope(P_asp,other=-0.311) and elevation(P_ele,other=-0.206) had the biggest indirect effect on the thickness of BSCs; (3) soil moisture content, soil texture, elevation and the coverage of Artemisia desertorum Spreng were the main decision variables of BSC coverage. The direct effect of soil texture and the indirect effect of the Artemisia desertorum Spreng coverage through with the soil texture were the main role of path of BSCs, coverage of Artemisia desertorum Spreng, slope and elevation were the main decision variables of BSCs thickness, the direct effect of Artemisia desertorum Spreng coverage, and the indirect effect of the slope which was through the Artemisia desertorum Spreng coverage and the elevation which was through the Poa sphondylodes Trin. coverage were the main role of the path of BSCs.

References:: [1] Greene R S B, Eldridge D J. Microbiotic soil crusts:A view of their roles in soil and ecological processes in the rangelands of Australia[J]. Australian Journal of Soil Research,1994,32(3):389-415.
[2] 李聪会,朱首军,陈云明,等.黄土丘陵区生物结皮对土壤抗蚀性的影响[J].水土保持研究,2013,20(3):6-10.
[3] 李新荣,张元明,赵允格.生物土壤结皮研究:进展、前沿与展望[J].地球科学进展,2009,24(1):11-24.
[4] 熊好琴,段金跃,王妍,等.毛乌素沙地生物结皮对水分入渗和再分配的影响[J].水土保持研究,2011,18(4):82-87.
[5] Fernando T M, Cristina E, Bowker M A. Biological crusts as a model system for examining the biodiversity ecosystem function relationship in soils[J]. Soil Biol. Biochem.,2009,42:1-13.
[6] 吴明山,胥辉.通径分析在林业多元线性模型共线性分析中的应用研究[J].西部林业科学,2008,37(3):83-86.
[7] 赵益新,陈巨东.通径分析模型及其在生态因子决定程度研究中的应用[J].四川师范大学学报:自然科学版,2007,30(1):120-123.
[8] 卜崇峰,张朋,叶菁,等.陕北水蚀风蚀交错区小流域苔藓结皮的空间特征及其影响因子[J].自然资源学报,2014,29(3):490-499.
[9] 焦雯珺,朱清科,张宇清,等.陕北黄土区退耕还林地生物结皮分布及其影响因子研究[J].北京林业大学学报,2007,29(1):102-107.
[10] 桑广书.黄土高原历史时期植被变化[J].干旱区资源与环境,2005,19(4):54-58.
[11] 李国英.统一思想全面推进黄河流域水土保持工作[J].中国水土保持,2003(12):9-10.
[12] 卢晓杰,张克斌,李瑞.北方农牧交错带生物结皮的主要影响因子探讨[J].水土保持研究,2007,14(6):1-4.
[13] 吴玉环,高谦,于兴华.生物土壤结皮的分布影响因子及其监测[J].生态学杂志,2003,22(3):38-42.
[14] 吕建亮,廖超英,孙长忠,等.黄土地表藻类结皮分布影响因素研究[J].西北林学院学报,2010,25(1):11-14.
[15] 成向荣,黄明斌,邵明安.神木水蚀风蚀交错带主要人工植物细根垂直分布研究[J].西北植物学报,2007,27(2):321-327.
[16] 李勉,李占斌,刘普灵,等.黄土高原水蚀风蚀交错带土壤侵蚀坡向分异特征[J].水土保持学报,2004,18(1):63-65.
[17] 贾恒义,雍绍萍,王富乾.神木地区的土壤资源[C]//中国科学院西北水土保持研究所集刊.西安:陕西科学技术出社,1993.
[18] 张琪,丛鹏,彭励.通径分析在Excel和SPSS中的实现[J].农业网络信息,2007(3):109-110.
[19] 袁志发,周静芋,郭满才,等.决策系数-通径分析中的决策指标[J].西北农林科技大学学报:自然科学版,2001,29(5):131-133.
[20] 孟杰.黄土高原水蚀交错区生物结皮的时空发育特征研究[D].陕西杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2011.

Similar References:

Memo

Last Update: 1900-01-01